list_reminder_markers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and falls short: it does not state whether results are filtered by default, whether date ranges are inclusive, how results are ordered, or whether output is paginated. Only the hint that all three states are included is disclosed.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and covered states come first. It is efficient, though the sentence is slightly awkward and could have used the remaining space for parameter meaning.

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 three-parameter listing tool with no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema descriptions, the description is too thin. An agent cannot tell what the date parameters do or how the result set is bounded.

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 compensate, yet it only loosely gestures at the 'state' parameter by naming its enum values. The fromDate and toDate parameters are never mentioned, so their format and semantics remain undocumented anywhere.

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 ('Показать') and resource ('ReminderMarker' / scheduled operations), which is clear enough to identify the tool. It does not, however, differentiate itself from the sibling list_reminders, leaving the agent to guess which listing tool to use.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus list_reminders, nor any stated prerequisites. The mention of planned/processed/deleted hints at filtering but never says when to apply it or what happens if omitted.

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