list_scheduled_jobs

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. The verb 'List' signals a read-only operation, and the content of results (last run status and timing) is disclosed. However, it doesn't explicitly state that no changes are made or that it provides a snapshot view, though that is largely inferable. Given the low-risk nature, this is adequate but not rich.

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, grammatically clear sentence with no fluff; the verb and object are front-loaded, making the purpose immediately apparent.

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?

This is a simple listing tool with no parameters and no output schema. The description tells the user what data will be returned (status and timing), which is sufficient for this level of complexity. It could note that it only covers 'monitored' cron commands, which is a constraint, but overall it's 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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty. Per the baseline rule, a score of 4 is given since the description doesn't need to compensate for parameter documentation when there are none.

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 specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource as 'monitored cron commands', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_cron_status (which likely targets a single job) by emphasizing the list scope.

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 clearly implies this is for listing all monitored cron commands, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like get_cron_status for per-job status, nor does it state when not to use it. This leaves usage guidance implicit rather than explicit.

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