next_runs

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only mentions return format (ISO-8601 with offsets) but lacks disclosure on side effects, error conditions, timezone handling, or any constraints beyond count max. For a read-only preview tool, more transparency is expected.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. First sentence defines action and output; second gives usage guidance. Efficient and well-structured.

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 3 simple parameters and no output schema, the description adds enough context about output format and use case. Slight gap on timezone details, but overall complete for this tool's complexity.

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 covers all parameters (100% coverage). Description adds value by specifying that output includes relative offsets, which supplements the parameter descriptions. Baseline 3 for high coverage, plus extra meaning justifies 4.

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?

Clearly states the tool computes next scheduled run times for a cron expression. Verb 'compute' and resource 'cron expression' are specific. Sibling tools (parse_cron, validate_cron, cron_presets) have distinct purposes, and the description implies differentiation without explicit mention.

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?

Explicitly says to use this tool to preview when a job will fire before committing. Provides clear context, but no when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives.

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