parse_cron

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core behavior (parsing into description and computing next run times) but omits important behavioral details such as handling of invalid expressions, timezone assumptions, and output structure. Since this is a read-only parser, the lack of side-effect warnings is less critical, but timezone/error behavior would be valuable.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the primary action and clearly states the two outputs. Every word contributes value with no redundancy.

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?

The tool is moderately complex (cron parsing and scheduling), the schema covers parameters, but there is no output schema and the description does not specify the return structure or edge-case behaviors like timezone handling and error responses. This leaves gaps for an agent needing to interpret results or handle invalid inputs.

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% for both parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already provides, such as example format for 'expression' and meaning for 'count'.

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 a specific verb ('Parse') and resource ('cron expression'), and specifies two concrete outputs: a human-readable description and next run times. This distinguishes it from siblings like parse_semver and datetime tools.

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 interpreting cron expressions but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. No alternatives are mentioned, though no obvious sibling overlaps with cron functionality.

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