list_todos

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It meaningfully discloses a key behavior: this tool returns every todo with no filtering, and frames it as a warning. It does not mention pagination, auth, or response format, but for an unfiltered read/list operation the core behavior is clearly exposed.

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 two sentences, front-loads the key behavior ('List ALL todos/tasks'), and then adds a targeted warning plus alternative. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 single-parameter list operation, the description is complete: it states what is returned, the required input context, and the alternative tool for filtered needs. The absence of an output schema does not leave a serious gap for this simple read tool.

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 describes the only parameter, calendar_url, as 'The URL of the calendar containing todos', so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not add any parameter-specific detail beyond confirming the calendar source, but none is needed with full schema coverage.

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 states a clear verb and resource ('List ALL todos/tasks') and intentionally distinguishes itself from the filtered search via the warning. The use of 'ALL' makes the tool's scope unmistakable and differentiates it from todo_query at a glance.

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 explicitly says when not to use this tool: whenever filtering is needed. It names the alternative tool (todo_query) and even lists the filter types (status, summary, or due date), so an agent receives direct routing guidance.

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