whats_onCheck upcoming, overdue, and due items across Tiong Creative apps on your Mac within a set number of days, including each item's app. Use it to see what needs attention.
Everything coming up across the Tiong Creative apps on this Mac within a number of days: overdue and due items, with the app each one belongs to. Start here for "what needs my attention".
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| days | No | How far ahead to look |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return content (overdue and due items, each tagged with its app) which is genuinely useful, but says nothing about read-only safety, response shape, item limits, or the meaning of days=0.
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 tight sentences, zero filler, and the scope statement is front-loaded ahead of the usage cue. Every phrase 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 single-optional-param, read-only aggregation tool with no output schema, the description conveys enough to call it correctly and even sketches the return content. Only minor gaps remain around result limits and the edge case of days=0.
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 coverage is 100% and the schema documents days as "How far ahead to look," so the baseline is 3. The description's "within a number of days" restates the schema without adding format or boundary semantics.
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 states a specific verb+resource: aggregating overdue and due items across the Tiong Creative apps, enriched with the owning app. The cross-app scope implicitly distinguishes it from per-app siblings like due_again_items and gift_keeper_upcoming, though it never names them explicitly.
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?
"Start here for 'what needs my attention'" gives clear entry-point guidance for the agent. It gives positive usage context but offers no exclusions or explicit alternate routing to the sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.