fireworks_get_fine_tuning_jobGet a single supervised fine-tuning job by id. Control-plane: GET /v1/accounts/{account_id}/supervisedFineTuningJobs/{job_id}.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| job_id | Yes | Supervised fine-tuning job id (the resource segment). | |
| account_id | No | Fireworks account id. Overrides FIREWORKS_ACCOUNT_ID for this call. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already set readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is known. Description adds the HTTP path info, which provides some context but no additional behavioral traits like error handling or throttling.
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 concise sentences with no redundant information. Every word adds value.
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 get-by-id tool, the description is nearly complete. It mentions the API endpoint pattern. However, it does not describe return values or error cases, which would be helpful but not critical given the tool's simplicity.
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 coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The description does not add meaning beyond what's in the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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?
Description clearly states 'Get a single supervised fine-tuning job by id', specifying the verb (get) and resource (fine-tuning job). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like fireworks_list_fine_tuning_jobs.
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?
Description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or conditions. It only states the basic operation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.