todo_lists

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description confirms 'Read-only — does not modify anything' and adds useful behavioral details about the data structure (e.g., well-known list names, etag). This additional context justifies a score above 3, though not a 5 because the annotations already cover the safety profile.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: first states purpose, second details return fields, third clarifies read-only nature and usage alternative. No fluff; front-loaded with the action.

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 simplicity, existing output schema, and sibling tool context, the description is fully complete. It covers purpose, behavior, fields, and when to use an alternative. Nothing essential is missing.

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?

Input schema has one optional parameter 'limit' with default 50. The description does not mention this parameter, and schema description coverage is 0%. While the parameter is simple and self-explanatory, the description does not add any meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'List the signed-in user's Microsoft To Do lists' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like todo_tasks by noting that to list tasks, pass the returned id to todo_tasks. It also enumerates returned fields, 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?

Explicitly states 'Read-only — does not modify anything' and provides a direct alternative: 'To list tasks within a list, pass the returned id to todo_tasks.' This tells the agent when to use this tool versus its sibling todo_tasks.

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