Todoist MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool lists labels but offers no information about output format, pagination, sorting, rate limits, authentication requirements, or error conditions. For a read operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('List all labels'). There is no wasted verbiage, repetition, or unnecessary detail, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool that likely returns a list of labels. It doesn't explain what data is returned (e.g., label names, IDs, colors), the response structure, or any limitations (e.g., maximum labels returned). For a read operation with no structured output documentation, the description should provide more context about the return values.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, meaning no parameters are documented in the schema. The description doesn't mention any parameters, which is appropriate since none exist. It implies the tool operates without inputs, adding value by clarifying it lists 'all' labels without filtering. Baseline 4 is correct for zero-parameter tools.

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 clearly states the action ('List') and resource ('all labels in the Todoist account'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_projects' or 'list_tasks', but the specificity of 'labels' provides inherent distinction. The description avoids tautology by not merely restating the tool name.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., authentication), contrast with other list tools (like 'list_projects'), or indicate when it might be preferred over other label-related tools (e.g., 'create_label' or 'update_label'). The agent must infer usage from context alone.

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