complete_reminder

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. 'Mark as complete' is vague—it doesn't specify whether the reminder is deleted, moved, or simply flagged. The agent cannot infer side effects or state changes beyond the verb.

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, concise sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. Every word is necessary, and there is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is minimal. However, it lacks contextual completeness—for example, it does not mention whether there are any constraints (e.g., reminder must exist) or what happens after completion. A more complete description would add such context.

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 zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty). The description does not need to add parameter info since there are none. The baseline score for no-parameter tools is 4, and the description confirms the action is self-contained.

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 'Mark a reminder as complete' clearly states the verb ('mark') and resource ('reminder'), and the action ('complete'). While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'complete_omnifocus_task', the use of 'reminder' provides implicit distinction. The purpose is specific and understandable.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'complete_omnifocus_task' or 'create_reminder'. The description lacks context for proper usage, such as prerequisites or expected outcomes.

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