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 stop recurrence' suggests a mutation (pausing), but it doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this requires specific permissions, if the pause is reversible, what happens to scheduled instances, 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 is extremely concise with a single phrase 'Temporarily stop recurrence', which is front-loaded and wastes no words. It efficiently conveys the core action without unnecessary elaboration, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'temporarily' means (e.g., duration or resumption behavior), the effect on task status, or return values. Given the complexity of pausing recurrence, more context is needed to understand the tool's behavior fully.

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 descriptions for all three parameters (task_id, pause_reason, resume_date). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining parameter interactions or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema adequately documents parameters.

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 stop recurrence' states the action (stop) and target (recurrence) but is vague about the resource (task) and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'ticktick_pause_habit' or 'ticktick_pause_focus_session'. It implies pausing a recurring task but lacks specificity about what 'recurrence' refers to in this 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., task must be recurring), exclusions, or compare to siblings like 'ticktick_set_recurring_task' for modifying recurrence or 'ticktick_update_task' for other changes. Usage is implied only by the tool name and description.

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