list_scheduled_tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses useful traits: tasks are locally stored, backed by Cron or millisecond intervals, and the listing includes runtime state and next run time. It does not explicitly state this is a read-only operation or mention pagination/ordering, but for a parameterless list tool the disclosure is reasonable.

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 front-loaded sentence that packs the resource, the task types, and the returned fields with no filler. Nothing to trim.

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?

For a simple zero-param read tool with no output schema, the description covers enough to call it correctly and even previews the returned data. It is only slightly short on how it relates to the sibling get/list variants.

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 there are no parameter semantics to clarify; the baseline for a 0-param tool applies. Nothing in the description misleads about inputs.

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 verb (Lists) and resource (scheduled tasks), and adds the useful qualifier that they are locally stored Cron or millisecond-interval JavaScript tasks with runtime state and next run time. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like get_scheduled_task or get_scheduled_task_runtime_status, which overlap in what they surface.

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 on when to use this versus get_scheduled_task (single item) or get_scheduled_task_runtime_status, despite those being obvious alternatives in the sibling list. The agent must infer routing from names alone.

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