list_automations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds that automations are 'persisted' and that next run times are returned, but provides no extra side-effect, permission, or rate-limit context. With strong annotation coverage, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

One concise, front-loaded sentence with no redundant content. It clearly states the action, target, and what information is included.

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?

With no output schema, the description partially explains return values by mentioning next run times. For a simple zero-parameter list operation with strong annotations, this is sufficient context, though it could be more explicit about the full list structure (e.g., IDs, names, schedules).

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty with 100% coverage. Since there are no parameters, the description cannot add parameter semantics, and the baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 clear resource ('persisted scheduled automations') and includes return details ('next run times'). It distinguishes itself from sibling list_automation_runs by focusing on automation definitions rather than run history.

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 usage for viewing all scheduled automations but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. There is no mention of alternatives like list_automation_runs or relationship to create_automation, so the agent must infer context from the name.

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