tg_schedule

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses a non-obvious behavioral trait ('delivers even if this machine is off') and explains timezone handling for bare ISO times. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema, though it doesn't cover error handling or side effects beyond sending.

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 brief, starts with a clear one-liner, and then lists arguments in a structured format. Every sentence adds value, with no filler or repetition.

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?

The tool has an output schema and four parameters, all well-covered. The description gives essential scheduling context and timezone behavior, making it complete for typical use. It omits optional details like cancellation or delivery guarantees, but those are not critical for invocation.

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 provides only names and types; the description fully compensates with clear explanations for each parameter. 'when' gets format examples and a timezone note, while 'reply_to' is defined as a message id. This significantly improves parameter understanding.

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 opens with 'Send a message later,' a specific verb and resource that clearly distinguishes it from immediate-send siblings like tg_send. The added detail 'Telegram delivers it even if this machine is off' further clarifies the scheduling behavior.

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 delayed delivery and gives concrete time format examples, which serves as guidance. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like tg_send, but the context is clear enough that an agent would know not to use it for immediate sends.

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