recommend_daily_tasks

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 usefully discloses the ranking criteria (priority, dependencies, recent progress), but says nothing about whether it only reads or also writes state, whether it is idempotent, or any permission/limit considerations for a tool that produces recommendations.

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?

A single tight sentence that front-loads the action and scope with zero filler. Every clause earns its place by naming the selection criteria.

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 low-complexity, zero-required-param read tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is mostly adequate. It is missing the two things an agent most needs: how it differs from recommend_daily_tasks_ai, and whether invoking it triggers any state change.

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% for both parameters, including the enum values for 'category' and the min/max/default for 'max_tasks', so baseline 3 applies. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, but none is needed.

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?

States a specific action (recommend/select tasks) with a clear scope (today) and even names the ranking inputs (priority, dependencies, recent progress). However, it does nothing to distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'recommend_daily_tasks_ai', which sounds functionally identical, leaving the agent unable to choose between them from the description.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative tool is named. 'For today' weakly implies a daily-planning context, but with a near-duplicate sibling (recommend_daily_tasks_ai) present, the absence of routing guidance is a real gap.

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