List cron events

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses the truncation cap (events holds at most the first 200 while count is the full total), that hook arguments are excluded from output, and the required capability (manage_options). These are exactly the operational facts annotations cannot express.

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?

Three tightly packed sentences, front-loaded with the resource and ordering, then output shape, then the truncation/auth caveats. No filler and nothing important buried at the end.

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?

With zero parameters and no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so fully: total count vs. returned list, per-event fields, truncation, and access requirement. An agent can call and interpret this tool without further information.

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 takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description instead spends its space documenting output field semantics (next_run ISO 8601 UTC, schedule false for single events), which is appropriate given there is no output schema.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('List the WP-Cron events scheduled on this site') plus ordering semantics ('soonest first') and the exact shape of each returned entry. No sibling tool covers cron events, so the resource alone distinguishes it from wp_list_plugins or wp_site_health.

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?

It states the practical use case ('check whether a job runs and when'), which gives an agent a clear reason to call it, but offers no explicit when-not guidance or named alternative for related diagnostics.

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