todo_list_items

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that status filtering is client-side, which is a behavioral detail. However, it does not mention lack of side effects, pagination, or other traits. The description is adequate but not rich.

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, using two short sentences. It front-loads the main action and provides essential detail without wasted words. Every sentence serves a 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 the tool is simple (list items) and there is an output schema, the description covers the basic behavior and filter. However, it omits explanation for the entity_id parameter, which is needed for invocation. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains the status parameter with values and filtering semantics, but does not describe entity_id at all, which is required and critical. This partial coverage limits usefulness.

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 tool lists items in a todo list and mentions the WS endpoint. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like todo_list_todo_lists by specifying it lists items, not lists. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other todo item tools.

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 mentions client-side filtering via status and typical values, implying when to use the filter. But it provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like todo_add_item or todo_remove_item, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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