get_trash

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, potential side effects, or authentication requirements. The output schema may partially cover return values, but behavior beyond that is omitted.

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 extremely concise at 4 words, front-loaded with the key action and resource. Every word earns its place, with no 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?

Given no parameters and an existing output schema, the description is fairly complete for a simple retrieval tool. However, it could provide a hint about the return format or that it retrieves a list, but the output schema likely fills that gap.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. Per guidelines, 0 parameters earns a baseline of 4.

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 'Get trashed todos' clearly specifies the action (get) and the resource (trashed todos). It is distinct from sibling tools like 'get_today' and 'get_upcoming', which target different subsets.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_todos' or 'search_items'. However, the purpose is self-explanatory given the tool name, so a basic score is appropriate.

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