Get Job

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about params_json being passed as keyword arguments and about typed-model operations, but it does not disclose return behavior, error cases, or required permissions, and its mutation examples are misleading for a read-only job fetch.

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 text is reasonably short, but it front-loads a redundant 'Get job (gitlab_graphql_ops)' and then devotes most of the paragraph to family-level guidance and mutation examples that do not apply to this specific tool. The useful parameter-mapping sentence is buried after less relevant context.

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?

With no output schema, the description should explain what a get-job call returns, and with only a generic params_json parameter it should indicate the expected operation-specific keys. It does neither, and it does not point the agent to the sibling schema-discovery tool for operation parameters, leaving a significant gap for correct invocation.

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?

The schema has only one parameter with full coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description meaningfully adds that params_json values are passed as keyword arguments to the named operation, and that some operations auto-build a typed model from those kwargs. It still does not enumerate the specific keys expected by get_job, such as a job or project identifier.

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 'Get job' and says it runs a typed GitLab GraphQL operation, so the basic mechanism is clear. However, it spends most of its text describing the GraphQL-ops family rather than this specific get-job operation, and it never explains what job data is fetched or how this differs from the REST sibling gitlab_get_project_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?

It gives general guidance to prefer GraphQL-native tools for GraphQL-only capabilities and rich nested reads, but it does not name the REST get-job alternative or say when to use this instead of gitlab_get_project_job. Worse, the examples it highlights (merge-request update/delete, pipeline retry/cancel, member mutations) belong to sibling mutation tools, not this read-only get-job operation.

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