playbook_schedule

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false (write), and the description confirms it sets a schedule. It does not mention potential effects like overwriting an existing schedule, whether the playbook must already exist, or any permissions needed. Adequate but lacks detail on side effects or prerequisites.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose, second provides usage examples. No wasted words. Efficient and front-loaded.

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 setter tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers purpose, schedule options, and usage scenarios. Minor gaps: no mention of required playbook existence or behavior when switching to manual.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It explains the 'schedule' parameter's enum values via user intent examples, but does not describe the 'name' parameter at all, leaving it to inference from sibling tools. Partial coverage; could be improved by naming the playbook as identifier.

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?

Clearly states verb ('Set') and resource ('how often a saved playbook runs automatically'), listing the three schedule options (manual, daily, weekly). Distinguishes from sibling tools like 'playbook_run_now' (one-time run) and 'playbook_create' (creation).

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?

Provides concrete user phrases ('run this weekly', 'schedule my playbook daily', 'stop the automatic runs') that map to the schedule values, giving clear usage context. Could be improved by explicitly contrasting with sibling tools like 'playbook_run_now' for one-time execution.

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