thruk_schedule_host_services_downtime

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the scope ('ALL services of the given host') and what it does not do ('not the host object itself'). It omits details on auth requirements, reversibility, or impact on monitoring, leaving significant gaps.

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, clear sentence that conveys the essential purpose with no fluff. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded.

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 has 8 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is too brief. It does not cover how to specify the downtime window (start/end vs duration), the meaning of 'fixed', or how to use the backends parameter. The description leaves the agent with insufficient context to invoke the tool correctly without relying solely on the schema.

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 only 25% (2 of 8 parameters have descriptions), but the tool description adds no additional parameter information. It does not explain required parameters (host) or optional parameters like start_time, end_time, duration, fixed, author, comment, or backends, which would significantly aid parameter selection.

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 action ('Schedule a downtime'), the target ('ALL services of the given host'), and explicitly excludes the host object itself, distinguishing it from related tools like thruk_schedule_downtime and thruk_schedule_propagated_host_downtime.

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 when to use this tool (downtime on all services of a host, not the host) and differentiates from alternatives by noting it schedules on services only. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context from sibling tools provides some guidance.

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