list_reminder_lists

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read-only nature ('Get') and output structure, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or whether the operation is paginated. It adequately describes the core behavior but misses advanced operational context.

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 concise sentences with zero waste. The first sentence states the purpose and source, while the second specifies the return values. Every word adds value, and it's efficiently front-loaded with the core action.

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 read-only tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It covers what the tool does, where it operates, and what it returns. However, without annotations or output schema, it could benefit from more behavioral context like error cases or platform-specific constraints.

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 tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately focuses on output semantics ('Returns list names, IDs, and reminder counts') rather than redundant input details, earning a baseline 4 for zero-parameter tools.

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 specific action ('Get all reminder lists'), resource ('from macOS Reminders app'), and output details ('Returns list names, IDs, and reminder counts'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_reminder' or 'get_reminders' by focusing on lists rather than individual reminders.

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 usage for retrieving all reminder lists, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like 'get_reminders' or 'create_reminder_list'. It doesn't mention prerequisites, exclusions, or specific scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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