get_pending_today

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It implies read-only behavior but does not explicitly state side effects, permissions, or rate limits. The hint about "gentle mention" adds some context but insufficient detail for complete transparency.

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?

Two sentences with zero wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded and the use case follows immediately. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the purpose and a usage scenario. However, it lacks detail on the exact return value (list of tasks? counts?) and how it differs from list_todos. Some gaps remain for full context.

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 has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it adds no conflicting information. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a no-parameter tool.

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 tool's function: "See what's still on the user's plate for today". It uses a specific verb-noun pair (see pending tasks) and differentiates from siblings like list_todos by focusing on today's items. The use case (mid-day or end-of-day check-in) adds specificity.

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 advises using this tool for "natural mid-day or end-of-day check-in" and hints at agent behavior ("worth a gentle mention"). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives like list_todos or check_tasks.

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