Lists all custom perspectives defined in OmniFocus, with simple name-only or detailed identifier output, so AI assistants can select and use them in task-management workflows.
List all custom perspectives defined in OmniFocus
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| format | No | Output format: simple (names only) or detailed (with identifiers) - default: simple |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the listing action but does not explicitly indicate that it is a read-only operation with no side effects, nor does it mention any performance or pagination characteristics.
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 a single sentence of 9 words, starting with a verb. It is concise and contains no extraneous information.
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 list tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete; it does not specify that the output is an array of perspective names or objects. The parameter hint at output format partially compensates.
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%; the schema already documents the 'format' parameter with enum values and a default. The tool description adds no extra parameter information, meeting the baseline expectation.
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 uses a specific verb 'List' and resource 'all custom perspectives' with context 'in OmniFocus', clearly distinguishing this tool from siblings like 'get_custom_perspective_tasks' (which retrieves tasks within a perspective) and 'list_tags' (which lists tags).
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as noting that 'get_custom_perspective_tasks' should be used to fetch tasks within a perspective. The usage context is implied but not explicitly compared to siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.