openclaw_cron_runs

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains that the tool wraps 'cron.runs', describes the compact option's effect (adding summaryTruncated flag), and mentions the runAtAgo field. It does not explicitly state it is read-only, but the context implies no side effects. Good behavioral detail for a listing tool.

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 concise, with three sentences each adding distinct value: main purpose, compact behavior, and output field. No fluff or redundancy. Structure is front-loaded with the core action.

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 no output schema or annotations, the description covers the essential usage (required id, compact option, output enhancements). Missing are explicit pagination details for limit/offset and explanation of instance routing. Still fairly complete for a listing tool.

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% (4 of 6 parameters have descriptions in schema). The description adds meaning beyond the schema by detailing the compact parameter (saves tokens, adds summaryTruncated flag) and explaining the runAtAgo field. It does not address limit/offset pagination, but provides sufficient context for the key parameters.

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 it lists recent runs of a specific OpenClaw cron job, using the verb 'List' and specifying the resource. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like openclaw_cron_run (which triggers a run), the tool name and description make the purpose unambiguous.

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 listing cron job runs but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., openclaw_cron_status). No when-not or context exclusions are mentioned, which is a gap.

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