cron_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It is transparent that this is a listing operation and explicitly mentions inclusion of system cron files and daily/weekly/monthly summaries. It does not describe the output format or failure behavior, but the permission requirement for all-user listings is present in the schema.

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 with no filler. The main function is front-loaded, and every clause adds a distinct scope or behavior, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

For a simple listing tool with no output schema and no nested objects, the description covers the supported scopes and extra system-file behavior, while the schema covers permissions. It does not specify the exact return shape, but that is not critical for this kind of 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 description coverage is 100%, so each parameter is already well documented. The description usefully summarizes the user/all/system modes but largely restates schema semantics rather than adding new meaning, and it provides no format-level detail for the 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 starts with a clear verb and resource: 'List cron jobs' and then enumerates the exact scopes: current user, specific user, all users, and system files. No sibling tool covers cron jobs, so it is immediately distinguishable.

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 clear context by explaining the three user-scope modes and the system-file inclusion behavior. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but no sibling tool competes with this function, so the guidance is sufficient.

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