combell_scheduled_tasks_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'cron jobs' clarification, but no additional behavioral context such as return format or scope of results. No contradiction with 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?

The description is a single, concise sentence with no filler. The key action and resource are front-loaded, and the parenthetical clarification adds value without bloating the text.

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?

For a simple, read-only list operation with one documented required parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate. It could mention what the returned list contains or whether pagination is involved, but the core invocation details are clear enough.

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 only parameter, domain_name, is 100% covered by the input schema description. The tool description reinforces the Linux hosting context, but does not add significant semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb ('List') and resource ('scheduled tasks (cron jobs)') scoped to a Linux hosting, making the purpose clear. It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling scheduled_tasks_get, but 'list' vs 'get' is a recognizable distinction.

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 implied: an agent would use this to retrieve scheduled tasks for a Linux hosting domain. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives like scheduled_tasks_get, nor any exclusions.

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