List cron triggers

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=true, idempotent=true, destructive=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact not present in the schema — the default sort is created_at descending, then id descending — but omits pagination behavior, result limits, or what a returned trigger contains.

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, well-formed, front-loaded sentence with zero waste. But the brevity comes from under-specification rather than discipline: it omits the tool's actual function, so the economy doesn't serve the agent.

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 9-parameter, read-only list operation with no output schema, the definition leaves the agent guessing about result shape and pagination semantics. Only the default ordering is supplied; the core purpose and usage context are absent.

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 78% with descriptive text, so most filters are self-explanatory. However, the two required parameters (orgID, projectID) have no descriptions in the schema or the description, and the description adds no parameter semantics at all — it does not compensate for that gap.

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 never states what the tool does — it only describes result ordering. Only the name/title ('crons_list' / 'List cron triggers') communicate that this retrieves cron triggers, so the description itself is effectively a restatement of supplemental detail rather than a purpose statement.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of how this differs from crons_get or crons_create, and no stated prerequisites (e.g., that orgID/projectID are required scope). The agent must infer all of this from the name and schema.

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