nexo_automation_schedule

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'set or clear' without explaining side effects, such as whether setting a cadence override overwrites existing schedules, what clearing does, or required permissions. Behavioral traits are inadequately disclosed.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words, making it concise. However, it lacks structure or escalation of detail, which could be improved by adding parameter explanations or usage examples.

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 complexity (4 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, many sibling tools), the description is too minimal. It does not explain what a cadence override is, how the parameters relate, or what the tool produces, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 0%, so the description should add meaning to the parameters. It does not mention 'every_seconds', 'daily_at', or 'clear', leaving their roles and interactions unexplained. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of 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 clearly states the tool sets or clears a cadence override for one operator-facing automation, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like nexo_automation_disable or nexo_core_schedule_set. However, the term 'cadence override' is not further defined, so it's not maximally clear.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description does not mention alternatives or context for using this tool over related siblings like nexo_schedule_add or nexo_core_schedule_set.

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