list_reminders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states that the tool lists pending or sent reminders, which implies a read-only operation without side effects. However, it does not clarify behavior when no status is provided (e.g., whether it returns all reminders) or describe output characteristics, leaving some gaps.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with no filler or redundancy. Perfectly sized for a simple tool.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional parameter, no output schema), and the description adequately explains its core functionality. It omits details like return format or sorting, but for a basic list tool, this is reasonably 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 schema already covers 100% of the parameter with a description ('Status do lembrete') and an enum. The tool description repeats the enum values ('pendentes ou enviados'), adding minimal new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 'Lista' (lists) and identifies the resource 'lembretes' (reminders) with a clear scope of 'pendentes ou enviados' (pending or sent). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_reminder and delete_reminder, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 clear context that this tool lists reminders with an optional status filter, implying when it should be used (to view reminders). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is strong enough for basic differentiation.

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