schedule_task

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

Despite no annotations, the description explains parameter values ('inbox', 'anytime', 'someday') and the effect of the 'evening' flag. However, it does not disclose that scheduling modifies an existing task, nor does it mention side effects or error conditions.

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 compact: a single-line overview followed by bullet-like arg details. Every sentence adds value without repetition or fluff.

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?

Covers input parameters well, but missing context on task existence requirement and behavior when conflicting parameters are provided (e.g., schedule='inbox' with a start_date). Output schema exists, so return values are not required in description.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: uuid (Task UUID), schedule (allowed values), start_date (Unix timestamp), evening (boolean effect). Adds critical meaning beyond the schema types.

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 schedules a task with options for 'today, anytime, someday, or a specific date'. It provides a specific verb ('schedule') and resource ('a task'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_task or update_task.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives such as update_task, which might also set scheduling fields. Missing context on prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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