List repeated grids

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds value beyond that: it discloses status semantics (active, paused, or stopped and why), which fields are returned (rhythm, next run, credits per month), and a cost trait ('Free'). Good behavioral context for a read tool.

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?

Single compact sentence, front-loaded with the resource, plus a one-word cost note. Every element (fields, status reasons, free) earns its place; no filler.

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 zero-param, read-only listing with annotations covering safety and description covering returned fields and cost, the definition is nearly complete. Without an output schema the description carries the return-shape burden and does list key fields, though it doesn't specify ordering, timestamps, or error behavior.

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?

No parameters (zero-param tool), so parameter semantics baseline is 4. Description correctly implies no filtering arguments and focuses on output fields, appropriate for a list-all endpoint.

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?

Specific: lists the account's repeated grids (schedules) and enumerates returned fields (rhythm, status with reasons, next run, credits per month). Clearly distinguishes from sibling list_grids (static grids) and schedule/update/delete_schedule by implying read-only listing. Slight ambiguity that 'repeated grids' is the schedule concept, but siblings make it clear.

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?

Usage is implied (list schedules) but no explicit when/when-not guidance or named alternatives. The 'Free' note adds cost context but not selection guidance relative to siblings like schedule_grid or update_schedule.

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