Create Cron Job

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

The tool has no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only says 'Create a cron job,' implying a mutation but providing no details about side effects, success/failure responses, idempotency, or access requirements. This is a significant gap for a create operation.

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 concise sentence that directly states the action. It is efficient and front-loaded, with no wasted words. However, it is so brief that it misses opportunities to add useful context, but for pure conciseness it is well-structured.

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 tool's complexity (3 required parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain key context such as the cron schedule format, the need for an absolute command path, or the role of the username. The description provides only the most basic idea and leaves the agent to infer important operational details from the schema alone.

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 provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters (command, schedule, username). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so it neither enhances nor degrades parameter understanding. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 the action ('Create') and resource ('cron job'), which clearly indicates the tool's purpose. It distinguishes from sibling tools like hosting_cron_list, hosting_cron_get_output, and hosting_cron_delete by specifying the create operation. However, it lacks any detail about the scope or type of cron job, limiting differentiation from similar create tools like agency_cron_create.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as agency_cron_create or hosting_cron_list. There is no mention of prerequisites, validation rules, or scenarios where this tool should or should not be used. The description is purely declarative with no contextual usage information.

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