hookbase_list_cron_jobs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool lists all cron jobs, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, authentication needs, or output format. The extra context about cron jobs making HTTP requests adds some value beyond basic listing.

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 two concise sentences: the first states the purpose, and the second adds helpful context about cron jobs. Every sentence earns its place, with no wasted words, and it's front-loaded with the core functionality.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 0 parameters, the description is complete for a simple list tool but lacks details on behavioral aspects like return format or limitations. It's adequate but has clear gaps in transparency for a tool with no structured data support.

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 has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description adds no parameter information, which is appropriate, and the baseline for 0 parameters is 4, as it doesn't need to compensate for any gaps.

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 the action ('List all') and resource ('scheduled cron jobs in the organization'), with additional context about what cron jobs do ('make HTTP requests on a schedule'). It distinguishes from siblings like hookbase_create_cron_job (create vs list) and hookbase_trigger_cron (trigger vs 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?

The description implies usage for viewing all cron jobs, with no explicit exclusions or alternatives mentioned. It doesn't specify when not to use it or name alternatives like hookbase_get_event (for specific events vs all jobs), but the context is clear for a listing operation.

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