get_scheduled_messages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It conveys a read-only list operation, but it does not explain whether scheduled messages remain scheduled, whether all statuses are returned, what ordering or pagination applies, or whether special permissions are needed. The description adds little beyond what the name and one-parameter schema already imply.

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 with no redundant words. It is efficiently front-loaded with the action and resource, earning its place without padding.

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?

The tool is low in complexity with one parameter and no nested objects, so a short description is acceptable. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits usage context, behavioral details, and return semantics, leaving noticeable gaps for an agent deciding whether and how to invoke it.

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%, yet the description provides no meaningful parameter information beyond the existing schema fields. 'in a chat' merely echoes the chat_id parameter's name and does not explain its format, constraints, or how it bounds the scheduled messages returned.

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 'List' with a distinct resource 'scheduled messages' and a clear scope 'in a chat'. This separates it from sibling tools like get_message, search_messages, or send_message without requiring the agent to open their schemas.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_message, read_messages, search_messages, or sync_messages. It does not state exclusions, prerequisites, or a preferred context, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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