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

The annotation readOnlyHint: true matches the description 'List generation jobs', which implies a read-only operation. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context, such as pagination, error conditions, or sorting details beyond 'newest first'.

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 that starts with the action verb and contains no unnecessary words. It delivers the core purpose and ordering in an efficient manner.

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?

The tool is low in complexity: one required parameter, no output schema, and a straightforward listing operation. The description provides enough information for an agent to decide when to call it, without needing details about return format or additional options.

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?

The schema provides a description for project_id ('Project id.') at 100% coverage, but it is minimal and does not explain how to obtain or validate the identifier. The tool description adds no further clarification, so the parameter remains underspecified.

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 specifies the action (List), the resource (generation jobs), the scope (for a project), and the ordering (newest first). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_projects (which lists projects) and get_job (which retrieves a single job).

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 enumerating all jobs of a project, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as get_job or list_episode_segments. It would be clearer to state 'use this when you need all jobs for a project' or mention that get_job retrieves a single job.

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