schedule_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency. It correctly states that the tool deletes the schedule but leaves workflow files untouched. However, it omits details on required permissions, side effects, or error handling, which limits transparency for a deletion action.

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 remarkably concise and well-structured. It starts with a clear verb+resource statement, then breaks into specific OS support and a crucial caveat, followed by a simple parameter listing. Every sentence serves a purpose without wasted words.

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 (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, scope, and what it does not do. It lacks details on return values or error states, but for a straightforward deletion tool, it is mostly complete.

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 has 0% schema description coverage for the 'name' parameter. The description's Args section adds minimal value by restating 'Name of the scheduled task to delete.' While this clarifies the parameter's purpose, it does not provide additional semantics like format, constraints, or examples, resulting in a baseline score of 3.

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 tool's purpose: 'Delete a scheduled task from the OS task scheduler.' It specifies the OS-specific schedulers (Windows Task Scheduler, macOS launchd, Linux cron) and emphasizes it does not delete workflow files, distinguishing it from related sibling tools like schedule_create and schedule_list.

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 provides context on when to use the tool by clarifying that it only removes the schedule, not the workflow files. Although it does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use, the information is clear and adequate for an agent to decide based on the sibling tool names (e.g., schedule_create, schedule_list).

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