tasks_list_todo_lists

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds that the tool requires Tasks.Read permission and scopes the data to the signed-in user's private To Do lists. It also identifies the output fields (id and display name), which is helpful since there is no output schema. However, it does not describe pagination or error behavior, so a 4 is appropriate.

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 then adding usage guidance. Every sentence contributes useful information without repetition.

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?

Given the simple nature of the tool (one optional parameter) and strong annotations, the description provides all essential information: purpose, output fields, usage timing, and permission requirement. It also places the tool within the task hierarchy (To Do vs Planner) and names downstream consumers of the returned id.

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?

The schema fully documents the only parameter max_results with its own description ('Maximum lists to return'), achieving 100% coverage. The tool description does not add parameter-specific semantics, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 specifies the exact resource: 'the signed-in user's Microsoft To Do lists'. It mentions the returned fields ('id and display name') and explicitly contrasts with Planner, distinguishing it from sibling tools like tasks_list_planner_plans.

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 an explicit usage scenario: 'Call this first when a task needs adding to a specific named list', and explains the purpose of the returned list id for use with tasks_create_todo and tasks_list_todo. It also notes the access requirement 'Requires Tasks.Read'. It implies not to use for Planner tasks by calling To Do 'separate from Planner's shared team boards'.

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