TickTick MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. 'Temporarily pause' implies a non-destructive, reversible mutation, but it doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it requires specific permissions, if it affects habit statistics or streaks, what happens if resumed later, or if there are rate limits. The description is minimal and lacks critical context for a mutation tool.

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 'Temporarily pause a habit' is a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse. Every word earns its place, and there's no unnecessary elaboration.

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 this is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral impact (e.g., how pausing affects habit tracking), error conditions, or return values. The schema covers parameters well, but overall context is insufficient for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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%, with clear parameter descriptions in the schema (habit_id as 'ID of the habit to pause', resume_date as 'Date to resume (YYYY-MM-DD), optional'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining what 'pause' entails or default behavior if resume_date is omitted. Baseline 3 is appropriate since 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 'Temporarily pause a habit' clearly states the action (pause) and resource (habit) with the qualifier 'temporarily' indicating it's not permanent. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'ticktick_delete_habit' (permanent removal) and 'ticktick_resume_habit' (resuming), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'ticktick_pause_recurring_task' or 'ticktick_pause_focus_session', which target different resources.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., habit must exist), when not to use it (e.g., for permanent deletion), or direct alternatives like 'ticktick_resume_habit' for reversing the action. Usage is implied by the name but not explicitly stated.

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