Pilot MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure, yet reveals nothing about case sensitivity, result ordering, result limits, or which task fields are indexed for search. It does not describe the return format or empty-result behavior.

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 consists of a single three-word phrase. While not verbose, this represents under-specification rather than efficient information density. It is front-loaded but carries minimal semantic weight.

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 presence of sibling tools list_omnifocus_tasks and create_omnifocus_task, the description should clarify the search mechanism and differentiate listing from searching. Without output schema or parameter details, the description inadequately covers the tool's contract.

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 input schema contains zero parameters, which per guidelines establishes a baseline score of 4. No additional parameter context is required or provided.

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 'Search OmniFocus tasks' is tautological, essentially restating the tool name without clarifying search scope (title, notes, project?) or syntax. It fails to distinguish from sibling tool list_omnifocus_tasks, leaving agents uncertain which to use for retrieval.

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 provided on when to use this versus list_omnifocus_tasks, nor any indication of search query syntax, wildcards, or filters. The description offers no prerequisites or conditions for invocation.

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