query_omnifocus

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that completed tasks are excluded by default and require include_completed=true, and explains the date format for completedAfter/completedBefore filters. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 brief, front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains no filler. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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 8 parameters and no annotations. The description only covers task completion filters and ignores how to query projects/folders, use fields/sorting/limit, or handle other filter scenarios. A more thorough description is needed for a complex query tool.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning to the 'filters' object by naming completedAfter/completedBefore, and clarifies include_completed. However, other parameters like entity, fields, limit, and sort_by are not described, leaving gaps.

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 queries the OmniFocus database and retrieves specific tasks, projects, or folders. The verb 'query' plus the resource types distinguishes it from sibling tools that add, edit, or remove 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 implies this is for querying rather than adding/editing/removing, but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. It provides filter context but lacks explicit exclusion guidance.

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