complete_reminder

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action (mark complete), but does not specify side effects (e.g., whether reminder is deleted or archived), reversibility, or authorization needs. Score 2 due to insufficient disclosure.

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?

Description is concise (one sentence, 4 words) and front-loaded. Could benefit from minimal additional context, but is appropriately sized for a simple tool. Score 4.

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 no output schema and zero parameters, the description omits how to specify which reminder to complete and what the response indicates. With many sibling tools, this lack of context may confuse agents. Score 2 for incomplete coverage.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so description adds no param info. Rule: 0 params gives baseline 4. Score 4, as no parameter detail is needed.

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?

Description clearly states the tool marks a reminder as complete, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'complete_omnifocus_task', missing an opportunity to clarify scope. Score 4 because purpose is clear but no sibling distinction.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'complete_omnifocus_task') or prerequisites (e.g., reminder existence). Agent must infer usage from context. Score 2 for no guidance.

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