hcm_get_job

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates that this is a read operation, but the description adds no behavioral detail beyond that, such as what happens when the job ID doesn't exist or what the response contains. It does not contradict the annotation.

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?

Four words with no filler, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word earns its place for such a simple getter.

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 single required parameter and read-only annotation, the description is sufficient to invoke the tool correctly. It lacks return-format details, but for a simple get-by-id operation this is not a critical gap.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for explaining the jobId parameter. 'By id' only weakly maps to the jobId field and adds no detail about format, source, or examples.

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?

States a clear verb and resource: 'Get job by id.' It conveys a get-by-id operation and distinguishes itself from search-style siblings by requiring a specific identifier, though it doesn't explicitly name the alternative search_jobs tool.

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?

Provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as hcm_search_jobs. There is no mention of prerequisites, when to prefer search over get-by-id, or what to do when the ID is unknown.

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