Add Reminder

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

Annotations already establish this is a write, non-idempotent, non-destructive operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond that — the default-list fallback when 'list' is omitted and natural-language date parsing — but says nothing about duplicate creation, permission/automation prompts, or what side effects occur on the reminder lists.

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?

Purpose and triggers are front-loaded in one sentence, followed by a scannable args block. The args block restates the schema but with example values, so it mostly earns its space, though it is somewhat redundant.

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 5-parameter creation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, triggers, and every parameter's intent and format. It stops short of saying what the call returns (e.g., an identifier for the new reminder) or error behavior on a missing list.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description genuinely adds meaning: concrete natural-language due examples ('tomorrow', 'Friday 3pm', '2026-04-05'), sample list names, and the priority enum values, going beyond the terse schema descriptions.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ('Add a new reminder to Apple Reminders'), which cleanly separates it from the edit/complete/delete/list siblings by name semantics. It does not explicitly name a sibling or a disambiguating condition, so it falls short of the top mark.

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?

It gives a rich set of trigger phrases ('remember something, create a task, set a to-do, schedule a deadline') that let an agent match intent confidently. However, it never states when NOT to use it (e.g., use edit_reminder for existing items) or names an alternative.

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