Set Cron Triggers

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

The description discloses that this is a full-set replacement (not incremental), the empty-list removal behavior, and the requirement for a scheduled handler. This adds significant context beyond the annotations, which already flag destructive and idempotent behavior. No contradictions 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 two sentences with zero wasted words. It front-loads the core action ('Replace'), then provides essential caveats and usage patterns. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with two simple parameters, strong annotations, and no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: the replacement semantics, the prerequisite, and the removal pattern. No meaningful gaps remain.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both parameters already described in the input schema. The crons parameter description even explains the replacement semantics and empty-list usage. The tool description reinforces this but does not add new parameter-level details, so 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 uses the specific verb 'Replace' with the resource 'a Worker's full cron trigger set', making the action and scope unambiguous. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_cron_triggers, which reads rather than writes, and other mutation tools.

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 indicates when to use this tool: to replace the entire cron trigger set. It adds the prerequisite that the Worker must export a scheduled handler, and explains the empty-list pattern for removing all triggers. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or 'when not to use', but the context is clear enough.

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