Auto_ScheduleAutoImport

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Configure', implying a mutable operation, but lacks details on side effects, permissions, or reversibility.

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?

Extremely concise at three words, but this comes at the cost of clarity. Critical information about schedules is missing, making it insufficient for effective tool selection.

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 complexity (nested object, no output schema, many siblings), the description is too minimal. It fails to explain the configuration's scope, required inputs, or how it differs from similar tools.

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 sole parameter 'body' is described simply as 'Request body' in the schema. The tool description adds no further meaning, leaving the structure and expected fields entirely unspecified despite it being a nested object.

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 identifies the resource ('Auto Import Schedules') and action ('Configure'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'Auto_ConfigureAutoImportInterval' which focuses on interval configuration. However, 'Configure' is somewhat generic and doesn't specify whether it creates, updates, or deletes schedules.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many auto-import related siblings, the description should indicate specific use cases or prerequisites.

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