vast_create_schedule

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries no behavioral disclosure—nothing about required permissions, default behaviors, quota handling, or effects on existing schedules. It only states the creation intent without any side-effect information.

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, efficient sentence with no filler. It is appropriately front-loaded with the action verb, though it could use more structure for such a parameterized tool.

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 tool has seven parameters and no output schema or annotations, this one-line description provides insufficient high-level context. It does not explain the schedule creation workflow, dependencies, or when creation succeeds.

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 documents all seven parameters. The description adds no preferential meaning beyond 'time-based ad delivery', so a score of 3 is appropriate as a baseline.

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 identifies the action ('Create'), the resource ('a new VAST schedule'), and the domain ('time-based ad delivery'), distinguishing it from related tools like vast_update_schedule or vast_delete_schedule. The inclusion of 'VAST' also differentiates it from non-VAST schedule tools.

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 on when to choose this tool over alternatives like create_schedule (non-VAST) or vast_update_schedule. The phrase 'time-based ad delivery' gives some context, but there are no explicit when/when-not or alternative tool references.

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