list_reminders

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

The 'without changing them' statement aligns with and reinforces the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds the 'persisted' qualifier but does not disclose much beyond what annotations already provide; this is acceptable since annotations cover the safety profile.

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 concise and the core purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, with parameter guidance following. Minor indentation whitespace is present but does not impede readability.

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 two simple boolean parameters, a readOnly annotation, and an existing output schema that can document return values, the description covers the essential usage decisions. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 0%, but the description compensates by explaining due_only as surfacing reminders needing attention now and include_handled as relevant only for historical handled reminders. This adds meaning that the bare boolean schemas lack.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and a precise resource ('persisted Hub reminders'), and explicitly notes the operation does not change them. This clearly distinguishes it from mutation-oriented siblings like set_reminder.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to set due_only=true ('at session start') and when include_handled=true is appropriate ('only when historical handled reminders are relevant'). Though it does not name alternative tools, the guidance clearly frames the intended use context.

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