Retrieve complete details of a specific reminder by its ID and list name. Use this to inspect notes, due dates, or priority after finding it with list_reminders.
Get full details of a specific reminder by ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| listName | Yes | List name containing the reminder | |
| reminderId | Yes | Reminder ID from list_reminders |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.8.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Get full details' hints at the return shape, but nothing is said about error behavior for a missing reminder, required permissions, or whether the lookup is scoped to an account. For a zero-annotation tool this is thin.
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?
A single efficient sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded and no filler. It is arguably too terse to be ideal, but nothing is wasted.
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 simple two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it omits the failure mode for an unknown ID and the meaning of the required listName scope.
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 100%, with both listName and reminderId described in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only the phrase 'by ID' and does not clarify the role of listName or the ID format, so it does not exceed the baseline.
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?
States a specific verb (Get) and resource (reminder) with a scope qualifier (specific reminder by ID), which cleanly separates it from list_reminders, create_reminder, update_reminder, and complete_reminder. It does not explicitly name or contrast with a sibling tool, so it stops short of a 5.
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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no preconditions, and no alternatives. The only indirect hint is that the ID comes from list_reminders, and even that is only in the schema field description, not the tool description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.