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 states the action ('Delete') but doesn't mention critical details like whether this is irreversible, requires specific permissions, or has side effects (e.g., on tasks within the section). This leaves significant gaps for a destructive operation.

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 ('Delete a section'), with no wasted words. It's front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core action, 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 the tool's destructive nature, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't address behavioral risks, return values, or usage context, leaving the agent with incomplete information for safe and effective invocation.

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 100% description coverage, with 'section_id' clearly documented. The description doesn't add parameter details beyond the schema, but with only one parameter and high schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate. The description's clarity on the action slightly enhances understanding, warranting a score of 4.

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 ('Delete') and resource ('a section'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'todoist_delete_project' or 'todoist_delete_task' beyond specifying 'section' as the target, which is adequate but not optimal for sibling distinction.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to delete a section versus updating it with 'todoist_update_section', or any prerequisites like needing the section ID from 'todoist_list_sections'. It lacks context for decision-making.

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