superpos_list_schedules

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action without mentioning safety (e.g., read-only), side effects, pagination, or limits. The agent cannot infer whether this operation is destructive or has other impacts.

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, well-structured sentence with no redundancy. Every word adds value, making it concise and easy to parse.

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 a simple tool with one optional parameter and an output schema (not shown), the description is minimally adequate but omits details like parameter explanation and usage context. It does not fully exploit the available schema richness.

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 0% and the description does not mention or explain the lone parameter 'hive_id'. The agent receives no additional meaning beyond the schema's name and type, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 verb 'List', the resource 'schedules', and specifies scope ('recurring/one-time', 'in the hive', 'create tasks automatically'). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like superpos_create_schedule and superpos_delete_schedule.

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 tells what the tool does but provides no guidance on when to use it versus other listing tools (e.g., superpos_list_hives, superpos_list_knowledge). There are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or context for selection.

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