wrike_list_work_schedules

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'List all work schedules' implies a read-only, no-filter operation, it does not disclose potential behaviors such as pagination, ordering, or any limitations. For a simple list operation this is minimal but acceptable.

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, concise, front-loaded sentence: 'List all work schedules.' There is no redundant or unnecessary information; it is perfectly sized.

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 zero-parameter list operation, the description is complete enough: it states exactly what is listed. However, without an output schema, it does not explain return format details, and with no annotations it lacks additional context like pagination. Still, the simplicity of the tool makes this adequate.

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 tool has zero parameters, which sets a baseline of 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics since there are no parameters to describe, and the schema already covers everything.

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 'List all work schedules' uses a specific verb 'list' and a specific resource 'work schedules', clearly indicating the action. It also distinguishes from the sibling 'wrike_get_work_schedule' by listing all schedules rather than retrieving one.

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 implicitly indicates use for enumerating all work schedules, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_work_schedule' for a specific one. There is no explicit context or exclusions, so usage is only implied.

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