list_scheduled_jobs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds that it lists 'run schedules', but no additional behavioral traits like pagination, performance, or data freshness are disclosed. With strong annotations, the description provides minimal extra behavioral context.

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 a single concise sentence without fluff. It could benefit from slightly more context (e.g., return format), but it is appropriately front-loaded and efficient for a simple listing tool.

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, the description does not describe the return format. The tool is straightforward, but the description lacks details on response structure, pagination behavior, or default limit. Annotations provide some context but the description remains minimal.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any meaning beyond what the input schema already provides for the three parameters (active, query, limit). The parameters are self-explanatory in the schema.

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 lists scheduled jobs and their run schedules. The verb 'list' and resource 'scheduled jobs' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like get_scheduled_job, create_scheduled_job, etc.

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 viewing multiple schedules, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like get_scheduled_job or trigger_scheduled_job. The context signals and sibling names suggest differentiation, but the description itself lacks explicit usage criteria.

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