reminders

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only mentions operations without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose permissions needed, rate limits, whether operations are destructive (e.g., 'create' modifies data), or how 'open' behaves. This leaves critical behavioral traits unspecified for a multi-operation tool.

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 that front-loads key operations. It avoids redundancy but could be more structured by clarifying operation distinctions. Every word earns its place, though it's slightly under-specified for a multi-operation 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?

For a tool with 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values, error conditions, or how operations interact with parameters (e.g., which params are needed for each operation). Given the complexity, more context is needed for effective use.

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 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond listing operations, which the schema's 'operation' enum already covers. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter semantics effectively.

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 the tool can 'Search, create, and open reminders in Apple Reminders app', which provides a general purpose but lacks specificity about what 'reminders' are or how operations differ. It distinguishes from siblings like 'calendar' or 'notes' by mentioning 'Apple Reminders app', but doesn't clarify functional boundaries between operations (e.g., 'list' vs 'listById').

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'notes' or 'calendar', or when to choose between operations (e.g., 'list' vs 'search'). The description lists operations but doesn't provide context for selection, leaving usage decisions to the agent without support.

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