Complete todo

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

Annotations already indicate the operation is neither read-only nor destructive; the description adds that the todo transitions to a 'done' state. It does not disclose whether completing is idempotent, reversible via todo_release, or what happens if the id is missing or invalid.

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 action-first sentence with no filler. It delivers the core operation and the required identifier without wasting tokens.

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 one-parameter mutation with annotations covering safety, the description is mostly sufficient, but it does not clarify the todo lifecycle relationship to release/claim or the result of successful completion. Given the sibling set, a short lifecycle note would make it complete.

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 single parameter 'id' already has a complete schema description including an example, and the tool description only repeats the concept of 'by id'. With schema coverage at 100%, the baseline of 3 applies without needing additional explanation.

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 names a specific action ('mark'), the resource ('a todo'), and the target state ('done'), and identifies the selection key ('by id'). This clearly sets it apart from siblings like todo_delete, todo_edit, and todo_claim.

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 guidance is given about when to use todo_complete versus alternatives. With eight siblings including todo_release and todo_claim, the description does not state conditions or exclusions, such as not for re-opening or not for editing details.

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