Add Todo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds the behavioral context of 'local storage', which is useful, but does not disclose side effects, idempotency, or the shape of the response. An output schema exists, so return information is covered elsewhere, but more detail on persistence or behavior would aid transparency.

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, direct sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the key information and is easy to parse.

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 single-parameter add tool with an output schema, the description is complete. It identifies the action, resource, storage context, and is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly without needing further explanation.

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 already describes the single 'text' parameter at 100% coverage. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score 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 action ('Add'), the resource ('todo item'), and the scope ('Panel Todo'), with a storage qualifier ('local storage'). This distinguishes it from sibling add tools for issues, sprints, and projects.

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 purpose is clear enough to imply when to use the tool, but there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. Since the tool is specifically for todos, the usage is self-evident, but exclusions or prerequisites are not mentioned.

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