list_jobs_with_samples

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic functionality without mentioning whether the operation is read-only, destructive, or any side effects. The description does not contradict annotations (none exist) but fails to provide sufficient behavioral context.

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, front-loaded sentence of 6 words with no filler or repetition. Every word is meaningful. There is no wasted space.

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 listing tool with no parameters and an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It specifies what the tool returns (jobs with sample information). However, it could be improved by noting if the list is all jobs or if there are any default filters, but overall it's sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's purpose.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100% trivially. Per guidelines, baseline is 4 for zero parameters. The description adds the context of 'sample information', which is not parameter-related but enhances understanding. No parameter details are needed.

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 'List all jobs with their sample information' clearly states the action (list), the resource (jobs), and the specific scope (with sample information). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_job_sample or get_job_status by focusing on listing all jobs rather than a single job or status.

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 versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention that this is for getting jobs with attached samples, or if there are other tools for listing jobs without samples. The description lacks any conditional or contextual hints.

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