list_ingestion_jobs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination behavior (start and limit parameters) but does not mention read-only nature, rate limits, idempotency, or potential cost implications. The description is adequate but lacks deeper 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 concise with a clear front-loaded purpose, followed by structured Args and Returns sections. Every sentence provides essential 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?

Given the output schema exists (not provided but referenced), the description is largely complete for a list tool. It explains pagination and return structure, but could mention sorting or filtering possibilities, though these are not required for basic completeness.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description clearly explains both parameters: start (offset, 0-based, default 0) and limit (number per page, default 10, max 100, -1 for all). This adds substantial meaning beyond the basic type information in the 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 explicitly states 'List data ingestion jobs on watsonx.data' using a specific verb (list) and resource (ingestion jobs). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_ingestion_job (single job), cancel_ingestion_job, and create_ingestion_job.

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 implies usage for listing ingestion jobs with pagination, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_ingestion_job for single job retrieval. No exclusion criteria or context for pagination parameters are given.

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