cron_next_runs

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 important behaviors: uses server time, local timezone, does not modify crontab, requires dependency 'croniter', and bounds parameter `n` to 1-20. It does not cover error handling for invalid schedules, but the key behavioral traits are well covered.

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 short, focused paragraph with each sentence adding value. It front-loads the purpose, then concisely explains constraints and behaviors. No wasted words.

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 presence of an output schema (context signal), the description does not need to explain return values. It adequately covers input semantics, behavioral constraints, and dependencies. The tool's purpose is fully captured 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that `schedule` must contain exactly five valid cron fields and `n` determines the number of results (bounded 1-20). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type and default, though the exact cron format is not fully detailed.

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 a specific verb ('Bereken' = calculate) and identifies the resource (future execution times for a cron schedule). It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'cron_list' (which lists existing cron jobs) and 'cron_add' (which adds jobs) by emphasizing that it does not modify anything.

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 states the tool calculates future execution times and explicitly notes it does not modify the crontab, implying it is a read-only analysis tool. While it does not directly say when not to use it or explicitly name alternatives, the context of sibling tools and the nature of the computation provide sufficient guidance.

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