vikunja_task_reminders

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden, but it only says 'manage' without disclosing side effects (e.g., idempotency, error handling, permission requirements). The enum implies the operations but offers no behavioral depth.

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 single sentence is concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. However, it omits necessary details, making it efficient but insufficiently informative.

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 annotations, no output schema, and 4 parameters with 0% coverage, the description is incomplete. It leaves agents guessing about parameter usage, return values, and operational nuances.

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 0%, so the description must add parameter meaning. It only lists operations, ignoring id, reminderDate, and reminderId. No format, purpose, or relationship is explained, forcing inference from names.

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 it manages task reminders with three specific operations (add, remove, list). This verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like vikunja_task_comments or vikunja_task_crud.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, contexts, or exclusions. For example, it could clarify that reminders are per-task and that this tool complements vikunja_task_crud.

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