get_schedule

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get full details' implies a read-only operation, and no side effects or mutations are mentioned. This is adequate for a simple getter, though error cases, authentication needs, or response shape details are not disclosed.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the parameter note follows directly without unnecessary elaboration.

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 one-parameter read operation with an output schema, the description covers the argument, how to discover it, and what kind of data will be returned. The only notable gap is the lack of explicit guidance distinguishing it from list_schedules, but the tool is still fully invocable.

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 provides zero description coverage, but the description compensates by explaining schedule_id as a 'Numeric schedule ID' and pointing to list_schedules for discovery. This gives meaningful guidance beyond the schema's bare string type, though exact format or constraints are not specified.

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 clearly states the verb ('Get'), the resource ('schedule'), and the kind of content returned ('full details ... command and timing'). It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling getters like get_rule, but the resource and content are unambiguous enough for an agent to select it.

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 gives one useful prerequisite: 'use list_schedules to discover IDs.' However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer get_schedule over list_schedules or other sibling tools, leaving the usage decision largely implicit.

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