Add reminder

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

The annotations already establish that this is a non-read-only, non-destructive operation, so the description does not contradict them. It adds only the scoping detail that a member may be targeted, but it does not disclose side effects like scheduling, persistence, dry_run behavior, or idempotency beyond what the schema provides.

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 two short sentences with the essential requirement 'text and the time with timezone offset' front-loaded. There is no filler, and every phrase contributes to understanding the core call.

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 100% schema coverage, output schema, and safety annotations, the description is workable but not rich. It does not clarify the relationship between the 'member' and 'for_member' parameters, nor does it surface the dry_run or idempotency_key behaviors except through the schema.

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 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter thoroughly. The description usefully highlights that the time must include a timezone offset and that a member is optional, but this adds little beyond the existing parameter descriptions.

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 identifies a specific verb and resource: it 'Adds a reminder at a specific time' and optionally for one member. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like list_reminders or cancel_reminder, but the resource and action are 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?

The description implies when to use the tool: whenever a reminder needs to be created with text and a scheduled time. However, it gives no explicit when-not-to-use guidance and does not point to any sibling alternative such as cancel_reminder or list_reminders.

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