This connector has been replaced by Reflecto.
cancel_reminderCancel a previously scheduled reminder by its reminder_id. Fire-and-forget: the server does not store reminders, so it cannot confirm the id was real — an unknown or already-fired reminder is silently ignored rather than reported as an error.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| reminder_id | Yes | The reminder_id returned by remind_me. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| status | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond annotations, the description reveals important behavior: the service is stateless, cannot verify the id, and silently ignores unknown or already-fired reminders. This is exactly the kind of fire-and-forget semantics an agent needs to handle responses correctly.
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 with the action front-loaded and the crucial behavioral caveat in the second sentence. There is no filler or repetition of schema details.
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 single-parameter fire-and-forget tool with an output schema and helpful annotations, the description covers the operation, the id source, and edge-case behavior. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.
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 schema covers 100% of parameters and already states that reminder_id is 'The reminder_id returned by remind_me.' The description reinforces this but adds no extra syntax or format guidance beyond the schema.
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 a specific verb and resource: 'Cancel a previously scheduled reminder by its reminder_id.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling remind_me, which schedules, and other unrelated notification tools.
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 implies the right usage context: cancel a reminder that was previously scheduled, using its reminder_id. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling list contains no competing cancel operation, so context is sufficiently clear.
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 action: scheduling vs cancelling reminders, pushing vs ringing a phone, sending vs receiving files/shared items, and requesting vs polling approvals. The only close pair, send_notification and remind_me, is clearly separated by immediacy vs future scheduling, and the descriptions reinforce the boundary.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: cancel_reminder, check_reply, get_shared_items, list_devices, request_approval, send_file, send_notification. Minor possessive forms like find_my_phone and remind_me still fit the imperative verb-first style without creating confusion.
Nine tools is well within the ideal range and each one earns its place in a personal-device integration server. The surface covers notifications, reminders, approvals, shared items, file delivery, device discovery, and phone location without redundant or filler tools.
Core workflows are covered: reminders can be scheduled and cancelled, approvals can be requested and polled, notifications can be sent, and shared items can be read incrementally. Minor gaps exist, such as no way to cancel a pending approval and no update mechanism for reminders, but these are workable and the server is explicitly stateless about some of them.