clickup_search_reminders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose pagination via cursor and that date filters are interpreted in the caller's timezone, which is genuinely useful context. It omits any statement of scope (all workspaces vs. one), default result set size, or what a returned reminder contains.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then filters, then the date-format caveat, then pagination. No sentence is redundant and nothing important is buried.

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 read-only, fully-optional-parameter search tool with complete schema coverage, this is nearly sufficient: formats, timezone semantics, and cursor pagination are all covered. The remaining gap is scope — whether results span all workspaces unless workspace_id is supplied — which the schema hints at but the description does not confirm.

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%, so all eight parameters are already documented with formats, enums, and bounds. The description mostly restates the date format the schema already specifies; its one real addition is the 'in your timezone' interpretation note. Baseline 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Search and list your reminders.' This clearly separates it from the create/update reminder siblings by operation type. It doesn't explicitly name those siblings, so it stops short of a 5.

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 lists the available filter dimensions (type, status, completion, since date), which implies when the tool is useful. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use vs. when-not guidance and never points to clickup_create_reminder or clickup_update_reminder as the write-side alternatives.

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