List cron jobs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the 'next execution time' output detail; it does not disclose pagination behavior, ordering, or any other runtime behavior, but it also does not contradict the annotations.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, states the scope, and includes the key output detail without any filler or repetition.

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 list operation, the description plus the fully documented input schema, the read-only/idempotent annotations, and the presence of an output schema cover everything an agent needs to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, and the schema already documents all three parameters, including repo_id lookup, page bounds, and per_page clamping behavior. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond connecting 'of a repository' to repo_id.

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 uses a specific verb ('Lists') and a specific resource ('scheduled pipeline runs of a repository'), and adds a concrete output detail ('next execution time of each'). This clearly distinguishes list_crons from sibling tools like get_cron or list_pipelines.

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 intended use is implied: call this when you need scheduled pipeline runs for a repository. However, the description gives no explicit guidance about alternatives, such as using get_cron for a single cron job or run_cron to trigger one.

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