add_to_reminders

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden for a mutation tool that writes into a user's Reminders database. It says nothing about whether repeated calls create duplicates, whether it is idempotent, what each reminder looks like, or that Reminders access must be authorized — all material facts for an agent deciding to invoke it.

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 purpose sentence is front-loaded and short, and the Args block is compact with no filler. The docstring formatting is slightly mechanical but does not waste space.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. But for an unannotated write operation with zero schema descriptions, the definition omits side effects, duplicate behavior, and authorization requirements — the gaps an agent most needs closed before calling it.

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%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: it explains that days_ahead is the look-ahead window for assignments and that account defaults to the active one. The only shortfall is that account does not point to list_school_accounts for valid values.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Add upcoming deadlines to macOS Reminders.' That is far more informative than the bare name and identifies the target application. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling get_deadlines, which presumably surfaces the same deadlines without writing them.

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?

'Upcoming deadlines' plus the days_ahead window implies when the tool applies, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of the sibling get_deadlines as the read-only alternative, and no prerequisites (macOS Reminders availability, permissions, account already switched).

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