schedule

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint: true. The description goes beyond by specifying that tasks are installed as macOS LaunchAgent or Linux crontab, and supports creation and deletion, giving clear behavioral context about system impact. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences front-load the purpose and provide key examples and install details with zero extraneous content. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

No output schema is present, and the description does not explain return values for list/create/delete actions. For a tool with 6 parameters, it lacks guidance on how parameters like 'command' and 'workingDirectory' interact. The description is incomplete for an agent to understand the full behavior.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, providing examples for the 'schedule' parameter already documented. No significant semantic addition for other parameters.

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 verb and resource: 'Create, list, or delete scheduled tasks.' It also provides natural language scheduling examples and installation targets, fully distinguishing its purpose from any sibling tools (none are scheduling-related).

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 implicitly indicates usage by listing actions and scheduling patterns (daily, weekly, hourly) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or comparisons to other tools are provided.

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