cron_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the operation without mentioning permanence, side effects, idempotency, or required permissions, which is a significant gap for a destructive action.

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?

A single sentence with no filler; the essential verb and object are front-loaded. It is appropriately small for a one-parameter tool, though terse.

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 destructive delete operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin. It omits behavioral context such as irreversibility, whether the job must exist, or what happens if deletion fails, making it minimally viable but not complete for safe invocation.

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 input schema covers the single required parameter cron_id at 100% coverage, so the description does not need to re-explain it. The description adds no extra parameter meaning, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('cron job'), making the tool's core function immediately clear. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, but the delete action is distinct from cron_add, cron_update, and cron_list.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus cron_update or cron_list, nor any mention of prerequisites or conditions. The only usage cue is the tool name and generic action, requiring the agent to infer when deletion is appropriate.

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