vikunja_task_reminders

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only mentions the operations without disclosing side effects, error handling, or permission requirements. For example, it does not state that 'add-reminder' is a write operation or what happens when removing a non-existent reminder.

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 one sentence, which is concise, but it is also under-specified. It could be restructured to front-load key information, such as stating that 'id' is the task ID.

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 complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It does not clarify relationships between parameters, required fields per operation, or return values.

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%, and the description does not explain any parameter. It fails to map operations to required parameters (e.g., that 'add-reminder' requires reminderDate). The description adds no value 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 specifies the resource (task reminders) and operations (add, remove, list). It is clear and distinguishes tool from siblings like vikunja_task_crud or vikunja_task_assignees. It could be improved by explicitly stating that the 'id' parameter refers to a task ID.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor on prerequisites or exclusions. The description only lists operations without context.

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