active_tasks

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral details: tasks are returned with running/queued first, includes error info for failed tasks, and explicitly states 'Read-only'. No contradictions with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise (3 sentences + args block), front-loaded with purpose and behavior, and each sentence earns its place. No redundant information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has 3 optional params and an output schema, the description covers purpose, return fields, behavior, parameter semantics, and even cross-reference to cancellation. It is complete for an AI agent to select and invoke correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains all three parameters: include_recent (default True, controls inclusion of completed/failed tasks), target (optional, uses default if omitted), and limit (max rows, None=all). This adds crucial meaning beyond the schema's type/default information.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description starts with '[READ]' and clearly states it returns in-flight and optionally just-completed vCenter tasks. It answers a specific question ('why is the cluster busy?') and lists returned fields (name, entity, state, progress_pct, etc.), making the tool's purpose immediately clear and distinct from siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly states the tool is read-only and directs users to 'vmware-aiops' for canceling tasks. It implies usage for monitoring cluster activity. While it doesn't list all alternatives, the context and sibling list (e.g., get_events, host_log_scan) make usage boundaries clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.