AgentsID Guard

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

cron_remove

Remove cron jobs matching a given pattern. Clean up scheduled tasks by pattern without manual editing, with permission control.

Instructions

Remove cron jobs matching a pattern. Requires cron.danger permission.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "pattern": "<pattern>"
    },
    "name": "cron_remove"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`pattern`	Yes	Text pattern to match in cron entries to remove

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses an important requirement (cron.danger permission) and implies bulk removal via pattern matching, but it does not detail return values, error behavior, or irreversibility. This is better than nothing but remains sparse.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two short sentences with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the verb and includes only essential information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with a single parameter and no output schema, the description is largely sufficient: it states the action, the matching logic, and a key permission requirement. However, the pattern format (e.g., glob vs. regex) and the consequences of removal are left ambiguous, which could cause misuse.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The only parameter, 'pattern', is fully described in the schema ('Text pattern to match in cron entries to remove'), giving 100% schema coverage. The description reiterates the pattern concept but adds no further semantic detail, such as matching syntax or whether multiple entries are affected.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Remove cron jobs') and the specific scope ('matching a pattern'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools cron_add and cron_list by focusing on deletion with a pattern match.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool (removing cron jobs by pattern) and notes a prerequisite ('Requires cron.danger permission'). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion cases, such as using cron_list to view jobs or cron_add to create them.

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