listRebootSchedules

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden and uses it well: it reveals that nextExecute is a millisecond epoch in UTC and warns about a concrete DST failure mode, plus states the auth requirement. It stops short of a 5 because it never explicitly confirms the operation is read-only or side-effect-free, leaving 'List' to carry that implication.

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?

Three sentences with no filler: purpose, then a high-value UTC/DST interpretation caveat, then the credential requirement. The verb-object is front-loaded and every sentence adds information an agent would otherwise lack.

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 one-parameter list tool with no output schema, this is nearly complete: purpose, result contents, a subtle data-interpretation trap, and credentials are all covered. The only meaningful gap is that it never points the agent to listSites for the siteId or describes the result shape.

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%, so the description must compensate, but it only notes that the tool operates 'for a site,' mapping siteId to its role without explaining how to obtain it (e.g., from listSites) or its expected format. The parameter's own name carries most of the semantic weight.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List reboot schedules') with explicit scope ('for a site') and enumerates what the response contains (which devices each one targets and the next execution time). The name and content clearly distinguish it from sibling mutation tools (createRebootSchedule, updateRebootSchedule, deleteRebootSchedule) and from listPoeSchedules.

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?

Usage is implied rather than explicit: the description reads as a straightforward read operation, and it does provide prerequisites ('Requires OMADA_WEB_USERNAME/OMADA_WEB_PASSWORD'). However, there is no when-to-use vs. when-not-to-use guidance or routing to alternatives such as listPoeSchedules or the create/update/deleteRebootSchedule trio.

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