create_schedule

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

There are no annotations, so the description must disclose behavior. It adds the meaningful detail that schedules are automatically linked to ad items via placements, which goes beyond a simple create operation. However, it does not mention mutation, idempotency, or response behavior, so it is minimal.

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 two sentences and immediately states the core purpose. It is front-loaded and contains 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?

With 15 parameters and no output schema, this brief description leaves operational questions unanswered, such as how placements are used, whether a placement must be pre-created, and what success returns. The automatic linking fact is helpful but insufficient for a complex creation tool.

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 schema already describes all 15 parameters. The description adds nothing about parameter semantics beyond the high-level time-based delivery context, 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 creates a schedule for time-based ad delivery, using a specific verb and resource. The additional sentence about automatic linking to ad items via placements provides scope and distinguishes it from generic schedule handling.

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?

No explicit guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus siblings like vast_create_schedule or draft_create_schedule. The only contextual hint is the placement linking, but it does not explain prerequisites or exclusions.

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