List Recurring Jules Schedules

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation and 'persistent' adds some context, but the description does not disclose output shape, whether canceled or expired schedules are included, or any pagination behavior. It does not contradict any annotations.

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 with no wasted words. 'Persistent' adds a meaningful nuance beyond the title, and the structure makes the tool's purpose immediately scannable.

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-parameter read-only listing tool, this description is largely complete: it names the exact resource returned. There is no output schema and no mention of status filtering, but the simplicity of the operation means the missing details are minor and partly captured under usage guidelines.

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 is empty with zero properties and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters that need documentation. With zero parameters, the baseline of 4 applies and the description does not need to add parameter-level meaning.

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 states a specific action, 'List', and a specific resource, 'persistent recurring session schedules', making the purpose immediately clear. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like jules_list_sessions, which lists sessions rather than schedules, and jules_schedule_recurring_session, which creates schedules.

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 usage context is implied by the wording: use this tool to view existing recurring session schedules. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or how it compares to alternatives like jules_list_sessions or jules_cancel_recurring_schedule.

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