coolify_create_scheduled_task

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

Annotations declare readOnly=false, idempotent=false, and destructive=false, but the description adds valuable behavioral context: 'Subject to operation mode, allowlist, and production guard policies' and 'Cron expression is validated.' This goes beyond the annotations by informing the agent about potential restrictions and validation behavior.

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 two sentences and 30 words, front-loaded with the action and object. It includes necessary constraints without fluff, and every sentence contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and limitations. No redundant repetition of schema information.

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 tool with 9 parameters and no output schema, the description conveys essential context: it targets applications/services, is subject to policies, and validates cron expressions. It does not explain return values or failure behavior, but the schema is richly described and the annotations provide safety profile, making the description reasonably complete.

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, meaning all parameters are documented in the schema itself. The description adds minimal parameter-specific meaning beyond mentioning that cron expressions are validated, which aligns with the 'schedule' parameter. Since schema covers the details, a baseline of 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 clearly states the tool's action: 'Create a scheduled task (cron job) on an application or service.' This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like update_scheduled_task, execute_scheduled_task, and list_scheduled_tasks, which cover other lifecycle operations.

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 usage context by mentioning 'application or service' and constraints like 'operation mode, allowlist, and production guard policies,' but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update_scheduled_task for modifying existing tasks). No exclusions or alternative tool names are provided.

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