todoist_tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'full CRUD operations and batch support' but lacks critical details like authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what happens during deletions (e.g., permanent vs. reversible). For a complex 20-parameter tool with mutation capabilities, this is insufficient.

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 functionality. It wastes no words and directly communicates the tool's scope without unnecessary elaboration, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool's complexity (20 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is inadequate. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like mutation safety, response formats, or error conditions. For a comprehensive CRUD tool with batch operations, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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 the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, such as explaining relationships between parameters or usage patterns. The baseline score of 3 reflects adequate but minimal value added by the description.

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 tool's purpose as 'Comprehensive task management for Todoist - create, read, update, delete, and query tasks with full CRUD operations and batch support.' It specifies the resource (Todoist tasks) and verbs (CRUD operations), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like todoist_comments or todoist_projects, which prevents a perfect score.

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 sibling tools like todoist_labels for label management or todoist_projects for project operations, nor does it specify prerequisites or contextual constraints for task management.

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