alcove_inbox_todo

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

No annotations provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states the action without disclosing side effects (e.g., whether the item is removed from inbox, any permissions required, or if operation is reversible). This is insufficient for a tool that likely mutates state.

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?

Description is a single sentence, making it concise. However, it is overly brief and lacks necessary detail. It could be expanded to include parameter context or usage notes without becoming verbose.

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 three parameters, zero schema description, and many sibling tools, the description is insufficient for correct invocation. It omits parameter meanings, output details (though output schema exists), and usage comparisons, leaving the agent underinformed.

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%, and the description does not clarify the three parameters: name, reason, workspace. Without explanation, the agent cannot infer correct usage beyond schema types. The description should at least hint at the role of each parameter.

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?

Description clearly states action (move) and target (inbox item to managed knowledge base todo). Distinguishes from sibling tools like archive, delete, and note by specifying a different outcome. However, 'managed knowledge base todo' is somewhat vague, lacking explicit definition.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as alcove_inbox_archive or alcove_inbox_note. The description implies a specific use case but does not provide explicit usage context or exclusions.

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