list_schedules

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'List time schedule profiles' without mentioning that the operation is read-only, idempotent, or what the response format entails. This lack of detail limits the agent's understanding of side effects.

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 extremely concise—four words—and immediately states the action and resource. There is no extraneous text, and being front-loaded allows the agent to quickly grasp the tool's purpose.

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 simple list tool with no parameters, the description is adequate but incomplete. It lacks details on what information is returned for each schedule profile, and no output schema is provided. More context, such as 'Returns all time schedule profiles with name and schedule details,' would improve completeness.

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 zero parameters, schema description coverage is 100% trivially. The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable since there are none to document. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate for a no-parameter tool.

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 'List time schedule profiles' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the tool lists schedule profiles. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like list_firewall_rules or list_users, none of which share this resource.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose is clear, there is no mention of context, prerequisites, or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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