List recurring automation schedules (read)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond 'client-side filters'. No contradictions; it adequately complements annotations but doesn't add much new information.

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, concise sentence of 12 words that front-loads the main purpose. Every word earns its place without unnecessary detail.

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 has 7 optional parameters and an output schema, the description is brief but covers the primary function. It omits mention of pagination (limit/cursor), org_id requirement (optional), and response_format. Adequate for a simple read tool, but more context would improve usability.

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 schema fully documents parameters. However, the description mentions a 'status' filter which does not exist in the schema (the actual parameter is 'active_only'). This inaccuracy reduces the value added beyond the schema.

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 title and description clearly state it lists recurring automation schedules (read-only). However, the sibling list 'action1_list_automation_schedules' exists, and the description does not differentiate between them, causing potential confusion.

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 mentions optional client-side filters but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., action1_list_automation_schedules). No when-not-to-use information or context about prerequisites.

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