schedule

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that a message will be scheduled for a future timestamp, but it does not mention authentication requirements, side effects, reversibility, error behavior, or return information for this mutation-style operation.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for the amount of information it attempts to convey.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and an empty input schema, the description is severely incomplete for a scheduling operation. It does not explain how to supply the rich text message, the future unix timestamp, or the target chat, nor does it describe authentication, results, or error handling.

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 input schema has zero parameters, and per the rubric this establishes a baseline of 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics because there are none, though the mention of a future unix timestamp suggests an input that the schema does not actually expose.

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 gives a specific verb ('Schedule') and resource ('a rich text message for a future unix timestamp'), so the action is clear. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from siblings like send, scheduled, or cancel, which limits it to a 4 rather than 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 phrase 'for a future unix timestamp' implies when the tool should be used, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of alternatives such as send for immediate delivery or cancel for removing a scheduled message.

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