Todoist MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it's a list operation but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens when no project_id is provided. The description is minimal and misses key operational details for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 and includes the optional parameter note, making it appropriately sized for its purpose.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a simple parameter, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values, error conditions, or behavioral aspects like whether it's a read-only operation. For a list tool with minimal structured data, more context is needed to be fully helpful.

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 already documents the single parameter 'project_id' with its description. The description adds marginal value by mentioning 'optionally filtered by project', but doesn't provide additional context like format examples or filtering logic beyond what the schema states.

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 ('List') and resource ('sections'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'todoist_get_section' (singular retrieval) and 'todoist_list_projects' (different resource). However, it doesn't specify scope beyond optional filtering, leaving some ambiguity about whether it lists all sections globally or within a context.

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 implies usage through 'optionally filtered by project', suggesting when to use the parameter. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'todoist_list_projects' or 'todoist_get_section', and doesn't mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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