keep_uncheck_items

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose the state-changing effect ('untick' and 'put them back on the shopping list'), which is minimally informative. It does not mention idempotency, whether items must already be checked, authorization needs, or failure behavior, but for this simple operation the stated effect provides a basic transparency baseline.

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?

A single sentence with a useful clarifying parenthetical. It is front-loaded and contains no filler, making it easy for an agent 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?

The tool is simple and an output schema exists, so the description does not need to explain return values. However, the description is incomplete as a standalone guide because it does not explain the roles of the optional parameters or provide usage boundaries relative to sibling tools. It is minimally viable but no more.

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 for parameter meaning. The description references 'items' only implicitly via 'checklist items', and says nothing about note_id or list_title, which are optional but likely affect which list/note is targeted. This leaves significant semantic gaps.

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 uses a specific verb ('Untick') and resource ('Keep checklist items'), and clarifies the result with a parenthetical effect. It is clear enough to be distinguished from keep_check_items semantically, though it does not explicitly name any sibling or contrast itself with 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 intended use is implied: use this tool when items need to be unchecked or returned to the shopping list. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it, nor any comparison to sibling tools like keep_check_items, keep_remove_items, or keep_add_items.

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