cron_run

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool executes a task immediately, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether this requires specific permissions, what happens if the task is already running, if execution is synchronous or asynchronous, error handling, or rate limits. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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, efficient phrase ('立即执行定时任务') that directly states the purpose. It's front-loaded with no unnecessary words, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick understanding.

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's complexity (a mutation operation with no annotations and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral aspects like permissions, execution mode, error responses, and how it interacts with sibling tools. The description alone doesn't provide enough context for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'jobId' documented as '任务ID' (task ID). The description doesn't add any meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or where to find the ID. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description doesn't compensate with extra details.

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 '立即执行定时任务' (immediately execute scheduled task) clearly states the action (execute) and resource (scheduled task). It distinguishes from siblings like cron_add (add), cron_list (list), cron_remove (remove), and cron_status (check status) by focusing on execution. However, it doesn't specify what 'immediately' means relative to normal scheduling, which prevents a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., the task must exist), exclusions (e.g., cannot execute if already running), or comparisons to siblings like cron_status for checking task state. Usage is implied but not explicitly stated.

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