Retrieve incomplete reminders from Apple Reminders, optionally filtered to a specific list, to track outstanding tasks.
List incomplete reminders (VTODOs), optionally from one list.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| list_name | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It conveys only that results are filtered to incomplete items; nothing is said about read-only safety, Reminders/OS access permissions, ordering, or how the default limit of 200 truncates results.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no padding. It is efficient, though its brevity leaves the optional filter clause doing double duty as both parameter hint and scope statement.
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?
An output schema exists, so return shape needn't be explained, but for a 2-parameter, unannotated tool the definition omits limit behavior, list_name semantics, and any routing against the sibling reminders tools, leaving real gaps for correct invocation.
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 0%, so the description must compensate. It gestures at list_name ('from one list') but never clarifies it is a list name string or whether matching is exact, and the limit parameter with its default of 200 is not mentioned at all.
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?
States a specific verb (List) plus resource (incomplete reminders/VTODOs) and adds the scoping dimension ('optionally from one list'). It implicitly separates itself from reminders_list_lists by dealing with reminders rather than lists, though it never names the sibling explicitly.
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?
'Optionally from one list' hints at when to pass list_name, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of reminders_list_lists as the way to discover valid list names, and no exclusion of alternatives such as a completed-reminders listing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.