List report schedules

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered, but the description adds nothing beyond the raw endpoint path. It says nothing about pagination, result ordering, whether schedules are workspace-scoped, or what a schedule object contains — context an agent cannot get from the annotations.

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?

A single short sentence with the purpose front-loaded and no filler. The parenthetical HTTP path is largely redundant for an agent that selects tools by name, but it does no harm and is brief.

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 no parameters, no output schema, and read-only annotations, the definition covers the minimum needed to invoke the tool correctly. It leaves open whether results are paginated or filtered by workspace, which matters for a list operation in a multi-tenant ad platform, so it is adequate rather than complete.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain; the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies a parameterless full-list call by naming only the endpoint.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('List report schedules'), which cleanly separates it from reportSchedules_create/update/delete and from reports_list. It does not explicitly contrast with the similarly named reportTemplates_list or reports_list, so it falls short of the sibling-differentiation bar for a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied by the verb 'List' — there is no statement of when to prefer this over reports_list or reportTemplates_list, nor any prerequisite or scope note. For a simple enumeration endpoint the implication is probably enough for an agent, but nothing is spelled out.

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