list_schedule

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 the date format (YYYY-MM-DD) and that the list is inclusive. It omits whether the operation is read-only, if pagination exists, what happens on empty results, or any required permissions. This is minimal for a tool lacking 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?

The description is extremely concise: one sentence followed by a brief format note. It front-loads the core purpose and wastes no words. Every element is essential.

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 low complexity (two simple params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is mostly complete. It covers what the tool does and how to use it. However, it could mention the return value (e.g., list of task objects) or error handling, but the minimal nature of the tool makes this acceptable.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description compensates by explaining the role of both parameters ('between startDate and endDate inclusive') and specifying the date format ('YYYY-MM-DD'). This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema, which only defines types and required status.

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 tool lists scheduled tasks within a date range, with inclusive endpoints. The verb 'list' and resource 'scheduled tasks' are specific, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like list_calendar or list_projects, which may cause ambiguity for an agent.

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 context on when to use (listing tasks by date range) but no guidance on when not to use or alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention that for tasks without date constraints, other list tools might be relevant, nor does it exclude other scheduling operations.

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