ssh_backup_schedule

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

No annotations provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It lacks details such as whether the schedule overwrites existing jobs, requires specific permissions, or triggers confirmation before applying. Only the basic operation is stated.

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?

Single sentence is efficient and front-loaded. However, it could incorporate additional context without losing conciseness, e.g., mentioning that it creates a cron job on the server.

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's complexity (7 parameters, 4 required, conditional fields like database and paths), the description is too minimal. It does not explain how the schedule is applied, what the return value indicates, or how retention interacts with backup type. Incomplete for an agent to fully understand usage.

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 has 100% description coverage, so the schema explains all parameters. The description adds no extra semantic value beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb ('Schedule') and resource ('automatic backups') and how ('using cron'). It distinguishes from immediate backup execution tools like ssh_backup_create, but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, leaving some ambiguity.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ssh_backup_create (immediate backup) or ssh_backup_restore. No mention of prerequisites, when not to use, or context for scheduling.

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