complete_reminder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose side effects and edge behavior. It only states that the tool marks a reminder complete, omitting what happens when list_name is omitted, how duplicate titles are handled, or whether the action is reversible.

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 concise and front-loaded, with the main action in the first sentence and a compact Args block. Every sentence adds necessary information without 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?

The simple two-parameter tool is adequately described for basic invocation, and an output schema exists to cover return values. Nevertheless, the lack of detail about list_name omission and ambiguous titles leaves some contextual gaps for an 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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds semantic meaning by identifying title as the reminder to complete and list_name as an optional search scope. However, it does not fully compensate by explaining default list behavior or matching rules, leaving the parameter semantics only partially clarified.

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 states the exact action 'Mark a reminder as complete,' with a clear verb and resource, making its purpose unambiguous. It also distinguishes itself from sibling reminder tools like create_reminder and list_reminders.

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 implies its use case—completing a reminder—and provides the optional list_name scoping, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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