Release a digest schedule early — send what users have collected so far now instead of waiting for the scheduled time. A 204 is also returned when the schedule has no in-progress instances to release.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| schedule_id | Yes | The digest schedule id, in the form "sch/{uuid}" |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate this is not read-only, not idempotent, and not destructive. The description adds behavioral nuance: it sends what has been collected so far and returns 204 even when there is nothing to release. This goes beyond the annotation hints.
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?
Two sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the edge-case behavior is stated in a compact second sentence.
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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the trigger behavior and the notable no-op case. It does not describe side effects on the schedule itself, but the essential invocation guidance is present.
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 coverage is 100% and the schedule_id parameter includes its format. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, but it doesn't need to because the schema fully documents the single parameter.
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 (release early), the resource (a digest schedule), and the effect (send collected content now instead of waiting). It distinguishes itself from list_digest_instances and other scheduling tools by explaining the early-trigger behavior.
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 when to use the tool ('instead of waiting for the scheduled time') and defines a meaningful edge case (no in-progress instances). It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the use case is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
