Show Reminders

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does imply a read-only operation with 'View', and it enumerates supported filter values, which provides behavioral context. However, it does not explicitly state the absence of side effects, authentication needs, or how results are returned, so it's minimally adequate but not rich.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every word contributes. It efficiently lists the supported filter values and the optional list filter without redundancy, making it appropriately sized.

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 simple tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core usage: viewing reminders with various filters. It does not mention default behavior (though the schema does) or output format, but these are minor gaps for a read-only listing tool, so it's fairly complete.

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 both 'filter' and 'list' having explicit descriptions. The tool description adds only a brief echo ('Optionally filter by list name') and does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline but adds little extra value.

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 verb ('View') and resource ('reminders'), and enumerates specific filter options (today, tomorrow, week, etc.). This distinguishes 'show-reminders' from sibling tools like 'add-reminder', 'delete-reminders', or 'complete-reminders', which imply different actions.

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 gives clear context on what filters are available (time range or status) and that list name is an optional filter. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings or mention any exclusions, so it falls just short of explicit when/when-not guidance.

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