delete_schedule

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

The description discloses the cascading effect of deleting the schedule and its jobs, which is a key behavioral trait. It also specifies the index is 0-based. Since no annotations are provided, this carries the full burden, but it does not mention irreversibility or permission 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 concise and front-loaded with the action, followed by a clear Args section. Every word earns its place; no wasted sentences.

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 deletion tool with one parameter, the description adequately covers the action, the parameter, and how to obtain the index. An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Minor omissions like behavior on non-existent schedules don't significantly detract.

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?

The schema only lists schedule_index as an integer with no description. The description adds crucial meaning by explaining it is 0-based and references get_schedule_status for the correct value, fully compensating for the schema's lack of information.

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 action: 'Delete a schedule and its jobs.' This uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_job and delete_repository.

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 but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like delete_job or when not to use it. It provides helpful context by referencing get_schedule_status for the index, but lacks explicit exclusion or alternative guidance.

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