TickTick MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Get daily summary' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires authentication, potential rate limits, or what the output format looks like. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how to use it effectively.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 complexity of a summary tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the summary contains (e.g., habit completion rates, streaks), how it's formatted, or any prerequisites. This makes it inadequate for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior and output.

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, with the single parameter 'date' fully documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it doesn't clarify what 'summary' includes or how the date parameter affects the output), so it meets the baseline score of 3.

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 clearly states the action ('Get') and resource ('daily summary of all habits'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'ticktick_get_habits' or 'ticktick_get_habit_stats', which could provide similar habit-related data, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools related to habits (e.g., 'ticktick_get_habits', 'ticktick_get_habit_stats'), there's no indication of what makes this summary tool distinct or when it's preferred over others.

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