remind_me

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond that by disclosing the returned fields (uuid, name, email, locale, admin/child flags, sign-in count), which is important since there is no output schema. It stops short of mentioning auth requirements or rate limits.

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 tight sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then lists return fields without waste. Every clause earns its place and nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of telling the agent what comes back, and it does so with a concrete field list. It is nearly complete for a zero-parameter read, though it omits any mention of error behavior or whether the response is a single object.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, which is the baseline 4 case; there is nothing for the description to clarify and it correctly avoids inventing parameter guidance. It stays focused on the resource rather than padding with irrelevant input detail.

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 gives a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('the signed-in Remind account') and even enumerates the fields returned, which is far more informative than the ambiguous tool name 'remind_me' suggests. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like remind_get_classes or remind_graphql, so it falls short of a 5.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus the many sibling read tools, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The phrase 'signed-in' hints that it returns the current user's own profile, but the agent must infer that this is the tool for identity/account context rather than anything explicit.

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