Add todo

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

The annotations already disclose that the operation is not read-only and not idempotent, so the mutation behavior is clear. The description adds the return behavior ('and return it') but does not go deeper into effects like persistence, duplicate handling, or ordering. This is acceptable for a simple create tool, but not especially informative beyond the annotations.

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 concise sentence with no filler. The action and return behavior are front-loaded, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 one-parameter create operation with an output schema and annotation context, the description is nearly sufficient. It covers the core action and return, though it does not explicitly explain how the new todo relates to list_todos or complete_todo; that relationship is inferable but not stated.

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 would need to compensate, but it does not actually explain the 'title' parameter or its role. The single parameter is reasonably self-evident from its name and the schema constraints, but the description adds no meaningful semantic value beyond what is already apparent.

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 ('Create') with a clear resource ('a new todo item') and states the return behavior. This makes the tool's purpose immediately distinguishable from the siblings list_todos and complete_todo.

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 that the tool should be used when a new todo item needs to be created, but it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. There is no mention of the sibling tools or any exclusion cases, so the usage context remains implicit rather than explicit.

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