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 states 'List calendar events', implying a read-only operation, but fails to detail aspects like authentication needs, rate limits, pagination, or what the output looks like (since there's no output schema). This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves.

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 extremely concise with just three words, front-loaded and free of unnecessary details. Every word ('List calendar events') directly contributes to the core purpose, making it efficient and well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 (a read operation with three parameters) and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, error handling, or behavioral constraints, making it insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's context and usage.

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 has 100% description coverage, clearly documenting all three parameters (start_date, end_date, calendar_id) with formats and purposes. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline score of 3, as the schema adequately handles parameter semantics.

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 'List calendar events' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('calendar events'), providing a basic understanding of the tool's function. However, it lacks specificity about scope (e.g., all events vs. filtered) and does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'ticktick_get_calendar_view' or 'ticktick_create_calendar_event', making it vague in context.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context (e.g., for viewing vs. creating events), or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction on appropriate usage scenarios.

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