list_reminders

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation. The description adds value beyond the annotation by disclosing the sort order and the inline person resolution behavior, giving the agent useful behavioral expectations.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The main behavior and sort order are front-loaded, followed by concise filter instructions. Every sentence contributes information.

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?

The description is acceptable for a simple read-only list tool, and the output schema reduces the need to explain return values. However, with 0% schema coverage and four parameters, the omission of status and due_before leaves meaningful gaps in the agent's ability to use those options correctly.

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 must compensate for all parameters. It covers person and person_id with filtering semantics, but completely omits status and due_before, leaving those parameters undocumented and the agent to guess their meaning and expected format.

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 the resource 'pull-based reminders', and adds sorting behavior ('due-dated first and communication notes last') that distinguishes it from mutation siblings like set_reminder and complete_reminder. It also clarifies the scope of the listing, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides clear filtering context: filter by person_id, or by person resolved inline, or omit both for all reminders. It does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or name alternatives, but the read-only listing versus write tools is evident from the description.

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