Get the user's stored settings, including their IANA timezone (e.g. "Europe/Berlin") if set. Use this to convert a spoken local time ("6pm", "tomorrow at 9am") into the correct UTC reminderAt — never guess or assume the user's timezone.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the timezone may not be set ('if set') and explains the purpose of the setting, which aids the agent in interpreting results. However, it does not specify the full structure of settings or whether other settings are included, leaving minor uncertainty about the return payload.
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?
Two concise sentences, each earning its place. The first sentence states the tool's purpose and key data point. The second provides a specific usage rule with an example. No wasted words, and the most critical information is front-loaded.
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?
For a no-parameter getter with no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what it returns, that the timezone is optional, and when to use it. The example ('Europe/Berlin') clarifies the expected format. The use case for converting local times is fully explained, making the tool self-contained in context.
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?
The tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there is nothing to document. The description adds context about the timezone value, which is more about the return data than parameters. With no parameters, the baseline of 4 is appropriate; description does not need to compensate for missing parameter info.
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 clearly states the tool retrieves the user's stored settings, with a specific emphasis on the IANA timezone. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on settings retrieval, which no other sibling covers. The verb 'get' and resource 'settings' are specific and unambiguous.
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?
Explicitly says to use this tool to convert spoken local times into UTC reminderAt, and instructs to never guess or assume the user's timezone. This provides clear when-to-use guidance and implicitly warns against alternatives (assuming timezone). The instruction is actionable and directly tied to a common use case.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource or action: note CRUD, checklist operations, label management, changelog entries, settings, and task queries. Descriptions explicitly differentiate between append vs. update, list vs. get, check vs. uncheck, and add vs. remove, so there is no ambiguity.
All tool names follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., add_label, get_note, check_item, update_note), with consistent verb choices. Even 'get_my_tasks' and 'uncheck_item' fit the pattern, so the naming is predictable and uniform.
14 tools is well-scoped for a notes application with checklist, label, and changelog features. Each tool covers a distinct operation without redundancy or bloat, and the count sits comfortably within the ideal 3-15 range.
The tool set covers full CRUD for notes, plus checklist management (add, check, uncheck), label management (add/remove), changelog entries, settings retrieval, and task aggregation. Minor gaps like archive/unarchive and a dedicated label list are workable, so the surface is near-complete for the domain.