openclaw_cron_add_daily

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behaviors: the cron schedule synthesis, agentTurn payload, parameter defaults (timezone, timeout), and optional channel delivery. However, it does not detail what happens when channel is omitted (result internal) or other side effects like overwriting existing jobs.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and free of fluff. Every sentence contributes essential information, making it easy to scan.

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 tool with 12 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality, required parameters, and optional delivery. It lacks details on return values or error conditions, but given the complexity, it is reasonably complete and actionable.

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 67%, so the schema already describes many parameters. The description adds value by highlighting the most critical parameters (hour, minute, tz, message) and their role in the cron schedule and agent payload, going beyond the schema's individual descriptions.

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 explicitly states the tool creates a daily cron job at a fixed local time, distinguishing it from sibling tools like openclaw_cron_add_weekly or openclaw_cron_add_once. It lists key parameters (hour, minute, tz, message) and optional channel delivery, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 daily scheduling through the tool name, but does not explicitly state when to use this vs. other cron variants (e.g., openclaw_cron_add_weekly). No direct guidance on alternatives or exclusions is provided, though the context of 'daily' is clear.

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