todo_create_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds nothing beyond that: no note on whether list names must be unique, what happens on duplicate names, whether the caller is the owner, or what the newly created list looks like.

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?

One short sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly under-specification rather than pure concision.

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 create tool with annotations covering safety, this covers the essentials of what it does. It is missing duplicate-name behavior and any hint of the return value (e.g., new list id), which matters since no output schema exists.

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 required parameter 'name' has zero schema description coverage, and the description only implies it is the list name. No constraints (length, uniqueness, allowed characters) or format guidance are supplied anywhere.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Create a new Microsoft To Do task list') and clarifies terminology with '(project)'. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from similarly named siblings like planner_create_plan or todo_rename_list, so an agent must infer the product boundary.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus planner_create_plan (create a Planner plan) or the rename/delete list siblings. The usage is only implied by the verb 'Create' in the name.

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