sonar_remedy_schedule

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Show' implies a read-only informational operation, which is useful, and 'pending jobs' clarifies scope. However, it does not describe side effects, return format, or what the 'state' parameter controls.

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 clear sentence with no filler or redundancy. It front-loads the action and resource, making the core purpose immediately understandable, although the missing parameter detail is penalized elsewhere.

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 tool with one required parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It omits the meaning of the required 'state' parameter, gives no output expectations, and lacks any guidance on alternatives among the many sibling tools.

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 only required parameter, 'state', has no schema description and is not mentioned in the tool description. Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds nothing about accepted values or how state affects the plan, leaving the agent unable to construct a valid call.

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 uses a specific verb, 'Show', and a concrete resource, 'the parallel/serial plan for pending jobs'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like sonar_remedy_progress or sonar_remedy_status by focusing on the plan rather than execution state or results.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool instead of the sibling tools, nor does it explain what 'state' should be provided. An agent cannot tell whether this is for pre-run planning, post-run reporting, or filtering by job state.

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