motion_recurring_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only mentions 'manage' and lists required parameters, lacking details on side effects, idempotency, or return behavior (e.g., what list returns, confirmation for create/delete).

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 brief (two sentences), but the first sentence is vague ('Manage recurring tasks'). The second sentence is a dense list that could be better structured for readability.

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 the tool's complexity (15 params, nested frequency object, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It omits output details, frequency configuration specifics beyond required fields, and error handling, leaving the agent without sufficient context for reliable use.

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 baseline is 3. The description summarizes required parameter combinations per operation, which adds some value by grouping them, but much of this info is already in the parameter descriptions (e.g., 'Required for: delete').

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 'Manage recurring tasks' and enumerates the three operations (list, create, delete), giving a clear purpose. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like motion_tasks, which may handle non-recurring tasks.

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 provides required parameters for each operation, which offers operational guidance. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., motion_tasks for one-time tasks) or any prerequisites.

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