show_reminder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the operation is a reveal (read) and returns JSON or an error, but it does not detail matching logic or potential side effects. The behavior is adequately described but not exhaustive.

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 short and well-structured with a clear opening sentence, then Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundancy or fluff.

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?

The tool has 2 parameters, one required, and an output schema. The description covers both parameters and the return type. It does not mention prerequisites or potential errors, but given the simplicity, it is largely sufficient.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. The Args section adds meaning by describing 'identifier' as 'Reminder id or name/title text' and 'list_name' as 'Optional Reminders list name.' This goes beyond the schema, though it lacks format details.

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 'Reveal an exact or uniquely matching reminder in the Reminders app,' using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_reminders (which lists all) and search_reminders (which may be more fuzzy).

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 implies usage for retrieving a single known reminder by identifier, contrasting with list/search siblings. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, so it lacks clear exclusions.

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