List reminders

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds valuable behavior beyond them: the default that only incomplete reminders are returned, and an enumeration of returned fields, which matters since no output schema 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?

Four short sentences with no filler, front-loading the source, filters, and the default-completion behavior before use cases. The return-field sentence is slightly list-like but earns its place given the absence of an output schema.

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 usefully enumerates returned fields (id, title, due date, completion status, priority, list name), and covers default filtering and search modes. It is complete for correct invocation, with only pagination behavior (beyond the limit param) left to 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 limit, title, list_name, and include_completed including defaults and bounds. The description only restates filter capability ('Search by title or list name') and the incomplete-by-default behavior, adding little syntax or format detail. Baseline 3 applies.

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+resource ('List reminders from macOS Reminders.app') plus its scope ('with optional filters' and 'Search by title or list name'). An agent can immediately distinguish it from the write-side sibling create_reminder without opening either schema.

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?

Explicitly names two use cases: checking for existing reminders before creating new ones, and verifying a recently added reminder. This gives clear when-to-use context, though it does not name the sibling tool (create_reminder) directly or state exclusions.

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