add_timer

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

With no annotations, the description partially discloses behavior by mentioning the wake mechanism and the 'once' option for single triggers. However, it omits details like persistence, error conditions, or side effects, leaving gaps in the agent's understanding of the tool's full impact.

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 concise, front-loads the purpose, and uses bullet points for clarity. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary words.

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?

While the description covers parameter semantics adequately, it lacks information about return values (no output schema), error handling, and whether timers survive restarts. For a 4-parameter tool with no output schema, completeness is moderate.

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?

Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description compensates well by explaining cron_expr format with an example, interval_seconds in seconds, and the once parameter's behavior. It adds meaningful context beyond the schema structure.

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 tool adds a scheduled task that wakes the agent at the specified time. It differentiates from siblings like list_timers and remove_timer by detailing cron and interval modes, which are distinct from other wake-related tools.

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 explains two modes but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_wake_rule. It lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use information, leaving the agent without clear selection criteria.

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