todo_finder

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure, but it only mentions cost and category. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, what it returns, what parameters it expects, or any side effects.

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 short and front-loaded, but the first clause is redundant with the tool name and the second only provides pricing. While not bloated, the brevity sacrifices substance.

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 an opaque generic parameter schema, this minimal description is completely inadequate for an agent to know what todo_finder does, when to invoke it, or what input to provide.

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 schema has a single generic 'params' object with the description 'Tool parameters as JSON object,' which counts as 100% description coverage. Since coverage is high, baseline is 3, but the description adds no actual meaning about expected keys or values.

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 merely restates the tool name ('todo finder') and categorizes it as an 'Other Utilities tool,' without specifying a clear verb or resource. It is essentially a tautology and does not differentiate from sibling tools.

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 is provided on when to use this tool, what it does, or how it differs from the many sibling utilities. The only added context is cost, which does not inform tool selection.

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