superpos_create_schedule

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains trigger types but fails to disclose side effects, permission requirements, or whether the schedule starts immediately. The return value is not mentioned even though an output schema exists.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes essential parameter guidance without unnecessary words. Every sentence is earned.

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 8 parameters and only 3 required but no output schema visible, the description is incomplete. It omits explanations for name, task_type, task_payload, and hive_id. The agent may lack context for what values to provide. No examples are given.

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 description adds value by explaining the relationship between trigger_type and the parameters cron_expression, interval_seconds, and run_at. However, it does not describe the meaning of name, task_type, task_payload, or hive_id. With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates partially but not fully.

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 creates a schedule that produces tasks automatically, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like superpos_create_task by focusing on scheduling. It also explains the three trigger types and associated parameters.

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 gives guidance on which trigger type to use and which parameters to include (e.g., 'cron' with cron_expression). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives like superpos_create_task, nor does it provide exclusion criteria or prerequisites.

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