apple_reminders_complete

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, and the description's 'Mark as completed' is consistent with those. The description adds the qualifiers 'local' and 'existing', which are useful, but it does not disclose side effects or error behavior beyond the annotations. With annotations present, the bar is lower, and this meets it minimally.

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 a single, unambiguous sentence with no filler or redundant wording. It conveys the action clearly in the fewest possible words.

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 simple one-parameter tool with annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It lacks explicit usage distinction from apple_reminders_update and does not mention idempotency or error behavior if the reminder is already completed. Adding a note about idempotence or a pointer to the update tool would improve completeness.

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 description covers 100% of the parameter semantics, stating that 'id' is the 'Reminder id returned by apple_reminders_list'. The description adds no additional parameter details, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 the verb 'Mark' and the resource 'Apple Reminder' with the specific outcome 'as completed'. It is distinguishable from create/delete/list, though it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling apple_reminders_update, which could also modify a reminder.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like apple_reminders_update. The description only states the action without prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer the intended use case.

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