create_schedule

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

With annotations all false and no output schema, the description carries the full burden and only states that a job is created. It doesn't disclose whether the job starts immediately, whether it validates the config, what the response contains, or how duplicates are handled.

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?

One short sentence with clear front-loaded action. The phrase 'runs at regular intervals' is slightly redundant with 'scheduled,' but there is no waste.

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 mutating 5-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits prerequisites, return behavior, and default/edge-case behavior, leaving the agent to infer critical call details.

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 description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond saying 'regular intervals,' and the schema already documents interval_minutes. It doesn't help with the undocumented name or stop_on_error parameters, and with 60% schema coverage the description should compensate but doesn't.

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 identifies a specific action ('Create') and resource ('scheduled scrape job'), and the word 'scheduled' separates it from one-off scraping tools like scrape_url. It doesn't explicitly name sibling tools, but the resource is distinct enough for an agent to choose it over update/delete/config 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?

There is no guidance on when to choose this tool over its siblings, such as 'use update_schedule to modify an existing job.' The create semantics are implied by the verb, but no context about prerequisites (e.g., an existing config_id) is given.

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