set_scheduled_task_enabled

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that enabling requires a configured schedule entitlement, but omits other behavioral details such as required permissions, reversibility, side effects on disabling, or return behavior.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the key prerequisite. No redundant or filler content; every sentence earns its place.

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 two-parameter toggle with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the core action and a notable entitlement prerequisite. It could be slightly more complete by contrasting with update_scheduled_task or noting behavior when the entitlement is absent.

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 coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents both id and enabled. The description does not add syntax, format, or constraint details beyond what the schema provides, matching the baseline of 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb (enables or disables) and resource (one scheduled task), making the purpose clear. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like update_scheduled_task, so it falls short of a 5.

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 (use this to enable or disable a scheduled task) but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or named alternatives. The entitlement note is a prerequisite, not routing guidance.

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