Create a task in Microsoft To Do from your AI assistant. Keeps reminders in sync without manual entry.
Creates a task in Microsoft To Do (via Reminders sync).
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "todo_create_task"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.0.330Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Creates a task' and 'via Reminders sync', lacking details on side effects, failure modes, or required account setup. The mention of sync hints at coupling but is insufficient.
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 a single sentence, making it concise, but it is too brief and lacks structure. It could include more detail without sacrificing conciseness.
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 no parameters, no output schema, and the complexity of task creation, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what task is created, how the agent should specify it, or any prerequisites.
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 input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds no parameter info, which is acceptable for a parameterless tool, but it fails to clarify how the task content is provided (e.g., from context or defaults).
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 action (creates a task) and the target (Microsoft To Do) with a mention of the sync mechanism, which helps distinguish it from similar tools like create_reminder. However, it stops short of explicitly differentiating from siblings.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives like create_reminder or create_omnifocus_task. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.