get_saved_job

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly communicates the scope of the operation ('get'), the resource scope ('tracked job'), and the return content (snapshot, description, status changes, notes). This is adequate for a non-mutating retrieval tool, though it does not mention auth requirements or error behavior.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the resource ('one tracked job') and then lists the included data. Every clause adds useful information, with no redundancy or filler.

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 low parameter count and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential selection and invocation information. It clearly states the output contents and the singular scope, though it could be more explicit about how this tool differs from get_job and what qualifies as a 'tracked job'.

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 has 0% description coverage, leaving the single job_id parameter undocumented. The description adds the context that job_id refers to a 'tracked job', which helps distinguish it from other job-related IDs, but does not explain the format, origin, or how to obtain a valid job_id.

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 states a specific verb ('get') and resource ('one tracked job') and clearly identifies the returned content: a snapshot with description and full event history. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_saved_jobs (plural) and get_job (not necessarily tracked/saved).

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 phrase 'one tracked job' implies use for retrieving a single saved job's full details, which differentiates it from list_saved_jobs. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this versus get_job, or mention any exclusions or alternatives.

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