get_job_state

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It only says 'comprehensive' without revealing whether the operation is read-only, requires special permissions, or what side effects might occur. Minimal transparency.

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 concise at one sentence, but it lacks structure and detail. It is not overly verbose, but the brevity sacrifices completeness, earning a middle score.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description does not explain the returned 'comprehensive' state. With one parameter and no behavioral context, it is incomplete for effective tool selection and usage.

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% and the description adds no parameter information. The single required parameter 'job_id' is not explained, leaving the agent without guidance on its format or usage.

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 the tool gets 'comprehensive job state information', but fails to differentiate from related tools like get_job_status or get_job_events. Among many get_* siblings, the purpose is vague without specifying what 'comprehensive' entails.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. The description does not mention any conditions or exclusions, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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