Retrieve OmniFocus forecast tasks due or deferred within a date range to plan upcoming work.
Get tasks from OmniFocus forecast perspective (due/deferred tasks in date range)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| days | No | Number of days to look ahead for forecast (default: 7) | |
| hideCompleted | No | Set to false to show completed tasks in forecast (default: true) | |
| includeDeferredOnly | No | Set to true to show only deferred tasks becoming available (default: false) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It mentions due/deferred tasks and date range but omits read-only nature, permissions, or result formatting. The name 'get' implies safe operation, but more detail would improve transparency.
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?
Single, clear sentence that conveys the essential purpose without wasted words. Information is front-loaded.
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 tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers basic purpose but lacks details on return format, ordering, or pagination. Adequate but not comprehensive.
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 has 100% description coverage for all three parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond schema, e.g., does not explain parameter interactions or defaults.
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 tool retrieves tasks from OmniFocus forecast perspective, specifying it includes due/deferred tasks in a date range. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_flagged_tasks or get_today_completed_tasks.
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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. With many similar get tasks, the description should indicate scenarios for forecast perspective or mention alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.