Todoist MCP Server

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 mentions 'parallel API calls,' hinting at performance or concurrency, but lacks critical details: whether this is a write operation (implied by 'create'), error handling for partial failures, authentication needs, rate limits, or what the response looks like. 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 with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action ('create multiple tasks at once') and adds a useful technical note ('uses parallel API calls'), making it appropriately sized and well-structured.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., error handling, permissions), usage guidelines compared to siblings, and expected return values. The high schema coverage helps with parameters, but overall context is insufficient for safe and effective use.

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 'tasks' parameter and its nested properties. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining batch size limits or interactions between parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate when 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 verb ('create multiple tasks at once') and resource ('tasks'), making the purpose evident. It distinguishes from the sibling 'todoist_create_task' by specifying batch creation, though it doesn't explicitly mention how it differs in behavior or when to choose one over the other.

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 the sibling 'todoist_create_task' or other alternatives. The description mentions 'parallel API calls' but doesn't explain implications like performance benefits, rate limits, or error handling, leaving the agent without clear usage context.

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