complete_todo

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses the action (marking open to-dos as completed), the effect of exact parameter, and the return value. Does not cover reversibility or authorization, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 relatively concise, using line breaks for readability. It front-loads the main purpose and uses bullet-like formatting. Slightly verbose in the exact explanation but overall efficient.

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's moderate complexity (3 optional params, output schema), the description covers targeting, behavior, and return. Missing error scenarios but sufficient for standard use. Output schema complements return details.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must and does explain all parameters: todo_id for exact safest, query for name matching, exact for precision. Adds significant meaning beyond schema types and defaults.

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 marks open to-dos as completed, with specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes targeting methods (by todo_id or query) and contrasts with the create_todo sibling by referencing its returned id.

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?

Provides clear targeting guidance (todo_id safest, query with exact option) and explains the exact parameter behavior. Does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to cancel_todo, but the context is sufficient for typical use.

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