get_cron_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and specifying the return fields (status, exit code, duration) adds useful context. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool has no side effects, nor does it describe error conditions or behavior when the command is not found.

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 of fourteen words, front-loading the verb and result. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or filler.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and return data. It could mention return formatting or edge cases, but the tool's simplicity and schema coverage make it adequately 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 schema fully describes the single parameter, including an example and partial-match behavior. The description's phrase 'specific cron command' adds minimal semantic value 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 uses the verb 'Get' and specifies the resource ('specific cron command') and the exact data returned ('last run status, exit code, and duration'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_queue_status or list_scheduled_jobs, which target different resources.

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 implies usage for checking the status of a specific cron command, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance. For example, it doesn't mention that list_scheduled_jobs should be used to see all scheduled jobs.

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