Dpanel Cron Template

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. The word '列表' implies a non-destructive read, and the fixed count of 10 hints at a static, cacheable catalog, but the description never states read-only behavior, pagination, or where these templates come from. Adequate but thin for a zero-annotation tool.

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?

A single short sentence with the resource front-loaded and no filler. It is efficiently sized, though so terse that it leaves the other dimensions under-served.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and a zero-parameter tool has little to specify. However, the description omits the one thing that would complete it for an agent: what these templates are for and how they relate to dpanel_cron_create.

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 takes zero parameters, so per the baseline there is no parameter semantics to explain and the schema cannot be deficient. Nothing in the description misrepresents the empty input contract.

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?

States a specific resource and verb ('计划任务模板列表' = scheduled-task template list) and even quantifies the payload (10 official templates), which distinguishes it from dpanel_cron_list, dpanel_cron_detail and dpanel_cron_create. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings, so an agent must infer the difference between 'templates' and 'actual cron jobs'.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and no alternative is named. An agent cannot tell from the text whether this is a static catalog to read before calling dpanel_cron_create or something refreshed dynamically. Usage is only implied by the word 'list'.

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