Microsoft 365 MCP Server

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

While the description aligns with annotations (destructiveHint: true) by stating 'Delete,' it adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations provide. It fails to disclose that deletion is permanent, explain the optimistic concurrency control (ETag/If-Match requirement), or describe what happens if the ETag check fails.

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 four-word description contains no verbosity, but it is under-specified for a tool with five parameters including concurrency controls. It front-loads the action but misses critical context that should accompany a destructive operation.

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 presence of destructive annotations, ETag-based concurrency parameters, and hierarchical resource identification (list + task ID), the description is insufficient. It neither explains the permanent nature of deletion nor the purpose of the If-Match header for conflict prevention.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the structured data adequately documents parameters including the If-Match ETag header and response control flags. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics, but the baseline score of 3 applies when schema coverage is high.

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 the verb (Delete) and resource (todoTask object), satisfying baseline clarity. However, it fails to distinguish from sibling delete operations (e.g., delete-planner-task) or indicate that this requires both a task list ID and task ID to locate the resource.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., needing to know the todoTaskListId) or whether to use update-todo-task to mark complete versus permanent deletion.

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