sniper_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the three behaviors and parameter combinations, but does not detail the consequences of stopping a job (e.g., irreversibility, side effects) or what 'inspect' returns.

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?

A single sentence conveys three modes of operation with parameter hints. No unnecessary words; front-loaded with the primary verb 'List'. Excellent 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 optional params, no required), the description covers the key behaviors. Output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed. However, it lacks context on what a 'sniper job' is and assumes the user knows the domain.

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 0%; the description adds critical meaning: job_id specifies which job to inspect or stop, and stop=true combined with job_id indicates a stop operation. It clarifies intended usage patterns beyond the raw schema, though it could be more precise about behavior when job_id is null.

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 three distinct actions (list, inspect, stop) on the resource 'sniper jobs', using specific verbs. It differentiates from sibling tools like 'start_course_sniper' which starts jobs, while this tool manages existing ones.

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 explains when to use each mode: list all, inspect by job_id, or stop with job_id+stop=true. It implies not to use for starting jobs, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use.

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