createScheduledTransaction

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

No annotations are provided, and the description gives minimal behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the operation is idempotent, required permissions, or constraints like date limits (schema partially covers that). The description fails to add value beyond the basic 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?

The description is a single sentence, making it concise. However, it is too brief for a tool with many parameters and constraints, sacrificing completeness for brevity. It earns a middle score as it is not verbose but could be better structured.

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?

Given the complex nested input schema, multiple optional fields, and constraints (e.g., date must be future <=5 years, no split transactions), the description is starkly incomplete. It omits essential context that an agent needs to use the tool correctly, especially without an output schema.

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?

With only 50% schema description coverage, the tool's description adds no parameter details. It does not explain the nested scheduled_transaction object or critical fields like plan_id, which are partially described in the schema. The description shoulders too little of the explanatory burden.

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 clearly states it creates a single scheduled transaction defined as a transaction with a future date. This distinguishes it from similar tools like createTransaction (immediate) and updateScheduledTransaction (modifying existing).

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 implies usage for future-dated transactions but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings like createTransaction. It lacks guidance on exclusions or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer from context.

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