motion_recurring_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It only lists required parameters and does not mention side effects, return values, or the destructive nature of delete. It lacks transparency about what happens when the tool is invoked.

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 sentence with a clear colon-delimited breakdown of operations, making it easy to scan. It is concise but slightly dense; however, every part contributes to understanding.

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 15 parameters, a nested frequency object, and no output schema, the description only provides the minimum required params. It lacks context about return values, behavior, or edge cases, leaving significant gaps for a complex tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying which parameters are required for each operation, which is not evident from the schema alone. However, it does not elaborate further on parameter formats or interactions.

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 states 'Manage recurring tasks' and lists operation-specific required parameters, making it clear that this tool handles CRUD operations for recurring tasks. It distinguishes from siblings like motion_tasks by focusing on recurring tasks, though the verb 'manage' is generic.

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 provides explicit required parameters for each operation (list, create, delete), giving clear context for when to use which operation. It does not mention exclusions or alternatives explicitly, but the per-operation breakdown is helpful.

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