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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations—'recent', 'newest first', and the returned fields—which helps the agent understand ordering and scope.

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 short sentences deliver the action, scope, returned data, ordering, use case, and a pointer to the related tool—all without filler. The most important information is front-loaded.

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 read-only list with one fully documented optional parameterholzer, the description explains what is returned, the ordering, and when to use it. The absence of an output schema is acceptable because the listed fields give the agent a clear expectation of the response.

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%, and the only parameter 'limit' is fully documented in the schema as 'Max jobs to return (default 50)'. The description adds no parameter detail, but none is needed given the schema already covers it.

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 'List your recent bulk jobs' with specific fields and ordering ('newest first'), making the operation and scope unmistakable. It also differentiates from siblings by noting 'details via bulk_status', so an agent can distinguish list from status detail lookup.

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 gives a clear use case ('recover a lost job id') and names the sibling tool for deeper follow-up ('details via bulk_status'). It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the context is clear enough for routing.

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