vikunja_filters

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'validation' but does not clarify whether operations are destructive, require authentication, or have side effects. The term 'manage' is vague and fails to specify what happens during create, update, or delete actions.

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 a single sentence, which is concise, but it lacks structure and does not front-load critical information. While not verbose, it is too terse to be fully informative.

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 two parameters with an enum of seven actions and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what each action does, what parameters are required for each, or what the tool returns. It falls short of providing sufficient context 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the schema provides no parameter details. The description does not explain the 'action' enum values or the structure of the 'parameters' object. It adds no meaning beyond what the schema already conveys.

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's purpose: managing and building advanced filters for tasks and projects, with validation. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vikunja_tasks or vikunja_projects, as no other tool is dedicated to filters. The verb 'manage and build' combined with the resource 'advanced filters' makes the purpose specific and actionable.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like vikunja_tasks or vikunja_projects. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or criteria for choosing between the seven actions listed in the schema.

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