todoist_remove_shared_labels

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('remove') but doesn't mention permissions required, whether the operation is reversible, error handling (e.g., if labels don't exist), or what happens to tasks with those labels. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and target without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward tool, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 this is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., success status, error messages) or behavioral aspects like side effects on tasks. For a tool that modifies data, more context is needed to guide safe usage.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents the two parameters ('labels' for batch operations and 'name' for single removal) and their structure. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying batch capability with 'one or more', which is already covered in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('remove') and target ('shared labels from Todoist tasks'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'todoist_update_task_labels' or 'todoist_rename_shared_labels', which also manipulate labels, so it lacks specific differentiation.

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. For example, it doesn't clarify if this is for batch operations (implied by the schema) or single removals, or when to choose this over updating task labels directly with 'todoist_update_task_labels'. The description offers no context or exclusions.

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