conduyt_send_report_schedule_now

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses the side effect (an email is sent), that the schedule state is not mutated, and a concrete rate limit of 3 per 10 minutes per schedule. It omits permission requirements and what the call returns, keeping it from a 5.

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?

One tight sentence with the action front-loaded, the non-mutation caveat in parentheses, and the rate limit last. Nothing is wasted.

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 the main behavioral risks (side effect, non-mutation, throttling) for a one-parameter tool with no annotations or output schema, but leaves the sole parameter undefined, which is a meaningful gap for correct invocation.

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?

There is a single required parameter 'sid' with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it or says it is a report-schedule UUID. With the schema providing no meaning and the description not compensating, an agent must guess what 'sid' refers to.

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?

States a concrete verb+resource ('Build and email a schedule right now') and clarifies that this is a one-off manual delivery, which distinguishes it from create/update schedule siblings. It doesn't name any sibling explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

'Right now' plus 'the schedule itself is untouched' implies when to pick this over editing a schedule, but no explicit when/when-not or alternative tool is named. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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