todoist_get_personal_labels
Retrieve all personal labels from Todoist to organize and categorize tasks for better workflow management.
Instructions
Get all personal labels from Todoist
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Retrieve all personal labels from Todoist to organize and categorize tasks for better workflow management.
Get all personal labels from Todoist
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it 'gets' data, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't mention any behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, response format, or pagination. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.
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 no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, 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 no annotations, no output schema, and a simple tool (0 parameters), the description is minimal. It states the purpose but lacks behavioral context (e.g., what data is returned, any constraints). For a tool in a set with many siblings, more guidance would improve completeness.
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 tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there's no need for parameter details in the description. The description doesn't add parameter semantics, but that's appropriate here, earning a baseline score of 4 for tools with no parameters.
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 ('Get') and resource ('all personal labels from Todoist'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'todoist_get_personal_label' (singular) or 'todoist_get_shared_labels', which would be needed for a perfect score.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'todoist_get_personal_label' (singular) or 'todoist_get_shared_labels'. The description only states what it does, not when it's appropriate or what distinguishes it from similar tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/HitmanLy007/todoist-mcp-server-extended'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server