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

Beyond the minimal annotations, it discloses useful behavioral details: rows contain a nullable attempt_id, summaries never include prepared_content, the tool is free, and it requires the 'act' scope. This gives the agent important operational knowledge.

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?

Three short sentences deliver the core purpose, row shape, usage instruction, and caveats. There is no waste and 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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers what the rows contain, the ordering, the follow-up action, and important exclusions. An agent has enough context to invoke it correctly and understand the returned data.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter burden on the description. Baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description adds no conflicting or unnecessary parameter information.

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 identifies the resource ('unclaimed preparation jobs'), the operation ('list'), and the ordering ('oldest first'). It also distinguishes the row contents, making it unambiguous what this tool returns.

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?

It explains exactly how to use the results: call pick_up_job with both job_id and attempt_id before starting. It does not explicitly name when to avoid this tool, but the context of unclaimed jobs is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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