Schedule message

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only and non-destructive, and the description adds critical context: messages are sent when the process is running, and missed messages are sent at the next start. This goes beyond annotations to clarify deployment requirements.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, alternative tool, and a notable limitation. No wasted words.

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 tool has 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, behavior, and a key limitation. It does not explain error cases or return results, but is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand scheduling 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 80%, meeting the high threshold for a baseline of 3. The description explains the repeat enum values (once, daily, weekly) but adds little else beyond what the schema already provides 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 tool posts a text message to a channel at a later time, with options for once, daily, or weekly repeat. It distinguishes from create_event by noting that tool is for RSVP events, ensuring the agent can differentiate.

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 explicitly contrasts with create_event for community events, but does not mention alternatives for immediate messages like send_message. It provides context but lacks exclusions for immediate use.

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