create_scheduled_report

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

Annotations already declare write/non-destructive behavior, and the description adds only "[Write]" and "recurring email delivery," which are largely inferable from the tool name and annotations. It does not disclose side effects such as non-idempotency implications, frequency validation, or whether an email is sent immediately.

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 a useful [Write] marker and no redundant wording. Every word contributes to the core purpose, making it highly concise.

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?

This tool has 6 parameters and no output schema, yet the description provides only a high-level action. It lacks important context such as conditional parameter requirements (e.g., day_of_week for weekly frequency), expected return values, or behavior when required fields are missing. The description is too sparse for a scheduling operation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the input schema fully documents each parameter's name and description. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the general purpose, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 "Schedule a report for recurring email delivery" clearly specifies the verb (schedule), the resource (report), and the delivery mode (recurring email), which differentiates it from generic scheduled job tools. It provides a specific and unambiguous purpose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like schedule_notification, create_scheduled_job, or generate_report. It does not mention prerequisites, alternative tools, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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