list_schedules

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and discloses useful return metadata (cron expression, enabled/disabled state, associated release name). It does not discuss auth or error behavior, but for a read-only list operation this is adequate.

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 compact and well-structured: one sentence for purpose, one for return values, one for related actions, and a simple Args line. Every sentence adds distinct value with no filler.

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 the simple single-parameter schema and presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, what metadata is returned, and how to toggle schedules, giving an agent enough to select and invoke it correctly.

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 schema has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), but the description adds an Args section explaining folder_name as 'the display name of the folder.' This fully compensates for the missing schema description for the single parameter.

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 it lists process schedules (time-based triggers) in a folder, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like enable_schedule/disable_schedule and list_folders.

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 explicitly mentions using enable_schedule/disable_schedule to toggle schedules, providing clear guidance on a related action. It does not explicitly contrast with other list tools, but the folder-scoped listing context is clear.

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