motion_recurring_tasks

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

No annotations exist, so the description should disclose side effects, auth needs, or destructive behavior. It only states 'Manage recurring tasks' and param requirements, omitting details like whether create/delete are idempotent or what happens on error.

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 sentence with a clear bulleted list per operation. No extraneous words; every sentence provides essential 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?

Given 15 parameters and high schema coverage, the description covers operation-specific requirements but lacks return value details (no output schema) and does not mention default behaviors or error handling. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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% parameter description coverage, but the tool description adds value by explicitly mapping required parameters to each operation, clarifying conditional requirements beyond the schema's 'required' field.

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 manages recurring tasks and lists required parameters per operation (list, create, delete). It distinguishes from siblings like motion_tasks which handle regular tasks, though it doesn't explicitly contrast them.

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 provides operation-specific required parameters, which helps within the tool but does not give guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like motion_tasks for non-recurring tasks or motion_projects for project management.

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