list_todo_items

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

The description is consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation and adds the scope of returning all items. However, it does not disclose potential ordering, pagination, or filtering behavior. Since readOnlyHint already covers safety, the added behavioral context is minimal but not contradictory.

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 extremely concise: one sentence for the primary action and one line for the argument. It is front-loaded and contains no irrelevant information.

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?

With an output schema present and a readOnlyHint annotation, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the essential behavior and the sole parameter. It lacks explicit alternative tools or edge-case behavior, but for a simple list tool this is sufficient.

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 provides only the type `integer` for `todo_list_id`, with no description. The description compensates by explaining that it is 'The numeric to-do list ID,' clarifying its meaning as the identifier of the parent list.

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 lists all to-do items in a to-do list, using a specific verb and resource. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like `list_todo_lists` and `get_todo_list`, though it does not explicitly name them as alternatives.

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 usage is implied by naming the required `todo_list_id` parameter, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus related list/get tools. For a simple one-parameter read, this is adequate but not explicit.

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