list_scheduled_messages

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it only implies read-only behavior through the word 'List'. It says nothing about result ordering, whether pagination is required for large result sets, defaults for limit, or what happens when neither filter is supplied.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity leaves the other dimensions thin rather than being a flaw of structure itself.

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 four-parameter, paginated list tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits return shape, pagination behavior, and ordering. The schema covers parameters well, but the agent gets no picture of what a call actually yields.

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 100%, so all four parameters are already documented, including the OR relationship between userIdentifier and channelIdentifier. The description restates the filter concept but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('scheduled messages') with the optional filter dimensions. An agent can distinguish it from get_scheduled_message or create_scheduled_message by the 'list' verb, though the description never names those siblings explicitly.

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 phrase 'optionally filtered by channel or user' implies when the filters apply, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-to-use-get_scheduled_message guidance and no mention of pagination workflow. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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