complete_todo_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action and parameter, with no mention of idempotency, return behavior, or error conditions, such as what happens if the item is already complete or does not exist.

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 clear sentence followed by a terse argument list. It is front-loaded with the action and contains 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?

Even with an output schema covering return values, the description lacks essential behavioral context: no annotations, no side effects stated, and minimal parameter guidance. The tool's overall behavior is underspecified for an agent to use reliably.

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 has no descriptions (0% coverage). The description's 'The numeric to-do item ID' restates the parameter name and integer type without adding meaningful semantics, such as where the ID comes from or any constraints.

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 opens with 'Mark a to-do item as complete,' which is a specific verb and resource. This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like uncomplete_todo_item and complete_milestone, as it explicitly mentions 'to-do item' and the 'complete' action.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this tool is for completing existing to-do items or that uncomplete_todo_item would be used to revert the action, leaving the agent without usage context.

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