todoist_create_label

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Create a new label,' which implies a write operation, but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens on success (e.g., returns a label ID). For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 ('Create a new label.') that is front-loaded and wastes no words. Every part of the sentence directly contributes to understanding the tool's purpose, making it appropriately concise for a simple creation tool.

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 complexity of a mutation tool (creating a label) with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., a label object or ID), any side effects, or error handling. For a tool that modifies data, this lack of context makes it inadequate for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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 description adds no parameter information beyond what's already in the schema, which has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all four parameters (name, color, isFavorite, order). Since schema_description_coverage is high, the baseline score is 3, as the schema adequately documents parameters without needing additional details in 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 action ('Create') and resource ('a new label'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like todoist_update_label or todoist_delete_label by specifying creation rather than modification or deletion. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other creation tools like todoist_create_project or todoist_create_task, which would require mentioning it's specifically for labels.

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 prerequisites (e.g., needing a Todoist account), when to choose this over updating an existing label, or how it relates to sibling tools like todoist_get_labels for listing labels. Without such context, the agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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