get_perspective_view

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the basic 'get' action. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, how it reacts to an invalid perspective name, or any constraints on returned data such as ordering, limit application, or metadata inclusion.

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, concise sentence with no filler or repetition. It is front-loaded and every word contributes to the core purpose, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the tool has three parameters, no annotations, and 0% schema description coverage. The description is too sparse to fully contextualize how to invoke the tool correctly; it omits all parameter semantics and usage guidance, leaving a significant completeness gap.

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%, and the description adds no explanatory value for any of the three parameters. It does not elaborate on what perspective_name means, how limit is applied, or what include_metadata controls, leaving the agent to rely solely on the schema titles and defaults.

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 ('Get') and a specific resource ('items visible in a specific OmniFocus perspective'), clearly indicating the tool's function. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like list_perspectives (which lists perspective names) and add_omnifocus_task (which creates items).

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 alternative querying approaches like query_omnifocus or dump_database. It does not mention prerequisites, such as needing to obtain the perspective name via list_perspectives, nor does it clarify what kind of perspective filtering is intended.

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