todoist_duplicates_find

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavior. It states the analysis uses content similarity and returns grouped tasks sorted by percentage, which is transparent but lacks explicit mention of read-only nature or side effects. The 'find' verb suggests no modification, but it's not definitive.

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 two sentences, front-loads the purpose, and contains no unnecessary words or redundancy. Every word earns its place.

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 the low complexity (3 parameters, no required fields, no output schema) and 100% schema coverage, the description adequately explains the tool's core functionality. However, it lacks details on output structure (e.g., whether task IDs or full objects are returned) and pagination, which 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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 3 parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool finds duplicate or similar tasks using content similarity analysis, and returns grouped results sorted by similarity. It differentiates from siblings like todoist_duplicates_merge by focusing on finding rather than merging, though not explicitly.

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 implies when to use the tool (to identify duplicates), but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or how it relates to siblings like todoist_duplicates_merge or other task retrieval tools.

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