List To Do tasks

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive hints. The description adds value by disclosing pagination (count and nextLink), page size default (50), and the default exclusion of completed tasks. It does not contradict annotations, and the added context enriches the behavioral picture without requiring the agent to infer from schema alone.

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 information-dense but every sentence earns its place: return fields, pagination, defaults, exclusions, and filter guidance. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and each subsequent sentence adds a distinct useful detail. No fluff or redundancy.

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 list operation with no output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: the exact data returned, pagination details, default page size, completion filtering, and a critical filter caveat about complex types. An agent has everything needed to call this tool correctly without consulting additional documentation.

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 baseline is 3. The description goes beyond by clarifying the filter syntax for dueDateTime as a complex type, giving a concrete example, and reasserting the top default. It also explains the interaction between includeCompleted and the filter, which is not fully explicit in the schema.

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 ('Lists'), a specific resource ('tasks in one To Do list'), and enumerates the exact fields returned (id, title, status, importance, due and reminder times, body preview). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like todo_list_lists (lists lists) and todo_get_task (single task) by focusing on the list-task scope.

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 tells when to use the filter and what not to use ($search), including a concrete example for the complex dueDateTime type. It also explains the includeCompleted default behavior, giving clear conditions for when to set it. This goes beyond mere context and provides actionable alternatives.

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