TickTick MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions filtering but doesn't describe output format (e.g., list of tasks, pagination), performance characteristics, or any side effects. This is inadequate for a tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, leaving key behaviors unspecified.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's appropriately sized for a filtering tool, though it could be more informative; the brevity is not due to under-specification but concise phrasing.

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 complexity (5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return values, behavioral traits, or usage context, leaving significant gaps for the agent to infer. This is insufficient for effective tool selection and invocation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the input schema fully documents all 5 parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying 'various criteria', which is already covered by the schema. This meets the baseline of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Filter tasks by various criteria' states the basic action (filter) and resource (tasks), but it's vague about scope and doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'ticktick_search_tasks' or 'ticktick_get_tasks_by_tag'. It lacks specificity about what 'various criteria' means beyond the generic verb.

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 'ticktick_search_tasks' or 'ticktick_get_tasks_by_tag'. The description implies usage for filtering but offers no context, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving the agent to guess based on tool names alone.

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