get_doc_schedules

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Lists' does signal a read-only, non-mutating operation, but nothing is said about permissions, whether the document must already have schedules defined, or error behavior for an invalid id. Adequate signal, but thin for an unannotated tool.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is efficiently sized, though the brevity leaves no room to convey the context this unannotated tool needs.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the tool is a simple single-parameter read. Still, with no annotations and no parameter documentation, the description leaves auth requirements and the relationship to sibling listing tools unaddressed.

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 description coverage is 0% for the single required parameter webi_doc_id. The phrase 'for a Web Intelligence document' loosely ties the parameter to a document identifier, adding marginal meaning, but it does not clarify expected format, source, or lookup requirements.

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?

States a specific verb (Lists) and resource (scheduled execution rules for a Web Intelligence document), which is concretely different from siblings like get_doc_instances or get_reports. It does not explicitly name or contrast against those siblings, so it falls short of 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?

The description gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no indication of how it relates to alternatives such as get_doc_instances (instances vs. schedule definitions). Usage is only weakly implied by the verb 'Lists'.

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