todo_add

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose two useful traits beyond the name: the new item defaults to 'pending' and the call returns the updated list. It omits whether writes persist across sessions, whether duplicates are allowed, and ordering behavior — meaningful gaps for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the return behavior appended where it belongs. Nothing is wasted and nothing needs to be cut.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be detailed, and the tool is trivially simple at one required parameter. The remaining gap is minor: no statement about duplicate handling or where exactly the scratchpad lives relative to workspace_info.

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 coverage is 0% and the sole parameter 'text' is undocumented in the schema, so the description must compensate. It only implies the parameter by describing the tool's effect ('add a todo'), giving no guidance on content format, length, or whether multi-line text is accepted.

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?

States a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('a todo') plus the default state ('status pending') and target store ('workspace scratchpad'). The verb cleanly separates it from siblings todo_list, todo_update, and todo_remove without needing to name them.

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?

Usage is only implied through the verb contrast with todo_update/todo_remove; there is no explicit 'use this when...' statement, no preconditions, and no mention of what to do if the item already exists.

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