search_cron_jobs

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only and non-destructive. The description adds no behavioral context beyond this, such as pagination behavior, default sorting, or client-side filtering details. It merely restates the search function without disclosing additional traits.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the tool's purpose with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise and easy to parse.

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 rich schema (all parameters documented), read-only annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description is adequate for a simple search tool. However, it could be slightly more helpful by noting that search_term filters by command/who fields, though that information is already in the schema. Overall, the description plus structured data provides sufficient context for correct 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 input schema has 100% description coverage for parameters, providing details for page, sort_by, page_size, and search_term. The description's mention of 'filtering and pagination' loosely maps to these parameters but does not add meaning beyond the schema. 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 'Search cron jobs with filtering and pagination' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_cron_job and delete_cron_job by focusing on searching, and the mention of filtering/pagination adds functional 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 implies the tool is for searching cron jobs but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or any exclusions. There is no mention of prerequisites or when to prefer other tools, leaving usage guidance to the user's inference.

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