add-reminders

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

The annotations already communicate that this is not read-only and not destructive. The description adds context about reminder types and the taskId requirement, but it does not disclose additional behavioral details such as duplicate behavior, notification delivery defaults, or error conditions.

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 compact and front-loaded. The core action is in the first sentence, followed by a concise list of reminder types and the key taskId constraint, with no redundant content.

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 complexity of the schema with multiple reminder variants, the description gives enough orientation to understand the domain and the three supported modes. The schema covers structural details like maxItems and per-field descriptions, and an output schema exists, so the absence of return-value details is acceptable.

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 schema provides very high description coverage (100%), so the description does not need to compensate heavily. It does summarize the three reminder categories and the taskId requirement, but it adds little beyond what the input schema already describes.

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 and resource: 'Add reminders to tasks.' It also distinguishes this from sibling tools like update-reminders and find-reminders by specifying creation as the operation and enumerating the three reminder types.

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 usage is implied well: when you want to add reminders to tasks, use this tool. However, there is no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives, such as using update-reminders to modify existing reminders.

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