run_schedule

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

Annotations indicate mutability and non-idempotency. The description adds that it returns a list of device_ids, but does not disclose other behavioral details like prerequisites, conflicts, or interactions with ongoing watering. It adds some value beyond annotations.

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 very concise: three sentences covering purpose, return value, and parameter. It is front-loaded with the action, and every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 simplicity (one parameter, output schema exists), the description covers the essential aspects. It could mention potential effects or prerequisites, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, but the description explains 'schedule_id: Schedule UUID to run', which adds basic meaning beyond the schema title. However, it does not elaborate on format or constraints, so it meets a baseline level.

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 action 'Start an immediate run of the schedule right now' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like preview_schedule and schedule management tools, making its unique purpose evident.

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 implies usage for triggering immediate execution but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid using this tool, nor compare it to alternatives such as preview_schedule or skip_schedule. Minimal guidance is provided.

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