github_actions_get_job_for_workflow_run

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits but does not. It fails to indicate that this is a read-only operation, what permissions are needed, or any side effects. The agent has no insight beyond the tool name and schema.

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 sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. It is not overly verbose, but it could include a brief note on usage without sacrificing conciseness. The minimal length is acceptable but not exemplary.

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 no output schema and many sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what data the job contains, how it relates to a workflow run, or how to interpret the result. The agent would likely need to guess or rely on external documentation.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the parameter descriptions are merely the parameter names ('owner', 'repo', 'job_id'). The description adds no additional meaning, such as how to obtain a job ID or constraints on these values, leaving the agent to rely on the implicit schema.

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 'Get a job for a workflow run', specifying a verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'list_jobs_for_workflow_run', which could cause confusion when the agent needs to choose between getting a single job vs listing all jobs.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_jobs_for_workflow_run' or 'get_workflow_run'. The description lacks context for prerequisites or filtering, leaving the agent to infer from the parameter names alone.

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