memory_create_todo

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

No annotations exist, so description carries disclosure burden. It mentions auto-tagging and return behavior, but omits side effects (e.g., idempotency, permissions, limits). Adequate but has gaps.

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?

Structured as a clear docstring with section headers. The content is efficient but slightly verbose (e.g., 'Args:' lines are functional). Overall good readability.

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?

Explains all parameters, return value, and auto-tagging. With an output schema present, it doesn't need to detail returns. Lacks only broader context (e.g., relationship to other tools), but nearly complete.

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 provides all parameter semantics: content, status, closed_reason, priority, category with defaults and examples. Adds high value beyond the bare schema.

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?

Clearly states 'Create a new TODO/task memory,' specifying a distinct resource type (TODO) that differentiates it from sibling tools like memory_create (generic) and memory_create_issue.

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 like memory_create or memory_create_issue. The description lacks explicit context for selection.

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