List Jobs For A Hedra Model

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: pagination (using cursor from previous response), ordering (most recent first), and the return shape ({jobs, next_cursor}). It does not mention potential errors or rate limits, but with strong annotations, this is sufficient.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. It uses a clear Args/Returns structure, includes optional/default/max constraints inline, and every sentence contributes necessary information without redundancy.

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 list operation with no output schema, the description covers all necessary context: purpose, pagination mechanics, argument descriptions, and the exact return structure. An agent can invoke and interpret the response correctly without external references.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's parameter section largely mirrors the schema, only adding minor guidance on cursor usage ('pass the previous response's next_cursor'). It does not meaningfully enhance the schema's already thorough descriptions.

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 ('List') and resource ('jobs submitted to one specific model'), with clear scope ('one specific model') and ordering ('most recent first, paginated'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like hedra_list_jobs, which likely lists jobs across all models.

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 description clearly indicates this tool is for listing jobs for a specific model, which implicitly separates it from hedra_list_jobs. However, it does not explicitly state 'use hedra_list_jobs for all jobs' or provide when-not-to-use guidance, so it falls short of a 5.

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