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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses ordering ('newest first') and that status filtering is optional, but says nothing about read-only nature, pagination behavior, default or maximum result count, or what happens when the limit parameter is omitted — significant gaps for a list endpoint.

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 with the resource and ordering front-loaded and no wasted words. It is efficiently written, though the brevity edges into under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but for a paged list tool with no annotations the description should cover result limits, pagination, and the meaning of shop_id. None of that is present, leaving an agent unable to call it correctly without guessing.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it only addresses the status filter. shop_id (required, the core scoping parameter) and limit (declared as type string, an unusual choice that especially needs explanation) are left completely undocumented.

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 names a specific resource and scope: jobs belonging to one shop, returned newest first, with an optional status filter. That is enough for an agent to know it is a filtered list operation, but it does not distinguish itself from siblings like jobs_findByTag or costs_jobs, which also surface job data.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus jobs_get (single job), jobs_findByTag (tag lookup), or costs_jobs. The 'optional status filter' hints at one usage mode but gives no guidance on defaults, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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