todoist-v1-mcp-server

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: 'This action cannot be undone' clarifies the permanence of deletion, which complements the destructiveHint annotation. However, it doesn't mention other behavioral aspects like error conditions or what happens to subtasks. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 perfectly concise with two sentences that each serve a distinct purpose: the first states the core action with critical warning, the second provides essential usage guidance. No wasted words or redundant information.

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 destructive operation with good annotations and a simple parameter schema, the description provides sufficient context about permanence and alternatives. However, without an output schema, it could benefit from mentioning what the tool returns (e.g., success confirmation or error).

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 input schema already fully documents the single required parameter. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, so it meets but doesn't exceed the baseline expectation.

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 the specific action ('permanently delete') and resource ('Todoist task'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like todoist_complete_task. It uses precise language that leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 explicitly provides when-not-to-use guidance ('For recurring tasks or tasks you just want to mark as done, use todoist_complete_task instead'), naming a specific alternative. This gives clear context for choosing between deletion and completion operations.

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