list_discovery_schedules

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds that run status is included, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not disclose default filtering, sorting, or pagination behavior beyond what the schema indicates.

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 sentence with no filler or redundancy. It communicates the core purpose and relevant output detail ('run status') efficiently.

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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description and schema provide sufficient context for basic invocation. It lacks explicit details on return fields beyond 'run status', but the simplicity of the tool reduces the need for more.

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 100% (the single 'active_only' parameter has a clear description). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline 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 clearly states the tool lists discovery schedules and includes their run status. This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from siblings like 'run_discovery_scan' (which executes scans) or 'list_scheduled_jobs' (generic scheduled jobs).

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 name and description imply usage for viewing discovery schedules, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives like 'list_scheduled_jobs' or when to set the 'active_only' parameter. The 'when-to-use' is implied rather than stated.

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