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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive); the description adds useful behavioral detail beyond that: filtering to incomplete tasks, returning a flat list, and listing the exact returned fields. No contradictions with the 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with action and scoping, and ending with user-oriented example queries. No filler or redundancy.

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 one-optional-parameter read-only tool with strong annotations and an explicit output-fields list, this is nearly complete. It could mention default/timezone/inclusive boundary nuances, but nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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 input schema fully documents days_ahead (type, default, description), and the description restates it as 'N days', adding little beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 applies due to 100% schema coverage.

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?

States a specific verb ('find'), resource ('Microsoft To Do tasks'), and precise selection criteria ('upcoming, incomplete ... due within the next N days'). It also names the output fields, so an agent can distinguish it from list_tasks/get_task and other task 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?

Provides clear when-to-use context via 'Use to answer...' and scopes to all of the user's to-do lists. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives like list_tasks or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a full 5.

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