Convert cron expressions or shortcuts like @daily into human-readable explanations so you can verify schedules without decoding cron syntax.
Explain a cron expression in human-readable terms.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| expression | Yes | Cron expression (e.g. '0 9 * * 1-5') or shortcut (@daily, @hourly). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.11Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the output is human-readable, and 'Explain' implies a safe read operation, but it does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior or describe handling of invalid expressions.
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 zero wasted words. It delivers the essential purpose directly.
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 one-parameter utility with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it states what the tool returns in general terms. It could mention invalid-expression behavior, but the core context is present.
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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents the single 'expression' parameter with examples and shortcuts. The description adds no parameter details beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 ('Explain') and resource ('a cron expression'), plus the output mode ('human-readable terms'). It is unambiguous and an agent can immediately tell what the tool does.
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 the tool is used when a cron expression needs explanation, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or any exclusions. With no sibling cron-explanation tool, the implied usage is adequate but not fully spelled out.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.