get_speed_schedule

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Get' and the noun 'configuration' communicate a read-only retrieval, but the description does not disclose what the response contains, whether schedules can be empty, or any prerequisites beyond the parameters.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It immediately identifies the action and resource, making it easy to scan and parse.

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 two-parameter read tool, the description provides the bare minimum required to call it. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it should ideally clarify what the returned schedule/configuration looks like and how it relates to neighboring speed-test tools.

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?

The input schema already covers both parameters with descriptions: 'URL to get schedule for' and 'The zone ID'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies due to full schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get scheduled speed test configuration', and scopes it to 'a URL'. This clearly separates it from sibling tools like get_speed_test or list_speed_tests, which concern test results or listings rather than scheduled configuration.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not explain how it differs from get_speed_test, list_speed_tests, or get_speed_page_trend, leaving the agent to infer the distinction from the word 'scheduled' alone.

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