list_jobs

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

With no annotations, the description discloses a key behavioral trait: 'raw is stripped from done-state summaries to keep the response cheap.' This adds useful context beyond a simple listing, though it could mention the response format (e.g., list of objects with summary fields).

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. The key information is front-loaded: what it lists, the trade-off, and the alternative. Perfectly concise.

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 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers everything needed: purpose, behavioral caveat, and fallback. It is complete for a simple list tool.

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?

There are zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter details and doesn't repeat schema information. It mentions the output characteristic (cheap, stripped raw) which indirectly relates to parameter semantics.

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 the tool lists all tracked jobs (running and finished) using a specific verb ('list') and resource ('jobs'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tool 'get_dispatch' by noting the omission of raw data for cheapness.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool (for a cheap overview) and when to use an alternative (get_dispatch for full payload). This guides the agent effectively.

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