cc-agent

update_cron

Modify an existing cron job's schedule, interval, prompt, or enabled status by providing the cron job ID.

Instructions

Update fields on an existing cron job.

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": {
      "cron_id": "<cron_id>"
    },
    "name": "update_cron"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`prompt`	No	New prompt (optional)
`cron_id`	Yes	Cron job ID to update
`enabled`	No	Enable or disable the cron (optional)
`schedule`	No	New schedule label (optional)
`interval_ms`	No	New interval in milliseconds (optional)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.16.15Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action. It does not disclose side effects, required permissions, or behavior when the cron does not exist.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Single sentence is efficient and to the point, with no wasted words. Slightly too minimal for full context, but appropriate for a simple tool.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given no output schema and many optional parameters, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain that only provided fields are updated, nor hint at return values or error conditions.

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 input schema already describes all parameters at 100% coverage, so the description adds no new meaning. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Update fields on an existing cron job,' specifying the verb (update) and resource (cron job), and distinguishes from sibling tools like create_cron and delete_cron.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no context on when updating is appropriate.

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