list_schedules

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'List all schedules.' It does not clarify the scope (e.g., account-wide vs global), pagination behavior, or read-only nature beyond the verb's implication. This minimal disclosure is insufficient.

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, front-loaded sentence of seven words, containing zero fluff. It is appropriately concise for a simple list operation.

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 large number of sibling schedule tools (vast_list_schedules, draft_list_schedules, list_report_schedules, etc.), the description lacks crucial contextual differentiation. It does not explain when to use this tool over alternatives or indicate what the response contains, making it incomplete for an agent to select the correct list 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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both 'limit' and 'offset,' so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already offers.

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 all schedules and defines them as time-based delivery rules for ad items. It uses a specific verb+resource, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like vast_list_schedules or draft_list_schedules.

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 guidance is provided for when to use this tool versus the many sibling schedule tools, such as vast_list_schedules or draft_list_schedules. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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