schedule_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses an important behavioral trait: the list includes both enabled and disabled schedules. However, it doesn't mention other behavioral aspects like return format, authentication requirements, or whether disabled schedules are included by default or require filtering.

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, clear sentence that front-loads the action ('List') and specifies the target ('tasks that have schedules configured'). No wasted words, and the parenthetical '(enabled or not)' adds precision without bloat.

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?

Given the tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. It clearly states what is returned (a list of tasks with schedules) and qualifies the scope. A minor gap is not specifying the output structure (e.g., task IDs vs. full details), but this is not critical for a simple list tool.

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, so the schema provides no parameter descriptions. The baseline for such cases is 4. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics since 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 clearly identifies the resource: 'tasks that have schedules configured'. It further clarifies scope by adding '(enabled or not)', distinguishing it from sibling tools like task_list (which likely lists all tasks) and schedule_get_all_status.

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 when to use this tool: when you want to see which tasks have schedules, regardless of enabled state. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear from the wording.

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