gitlab_get_job

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'get the current status' without explicitly confirming it is a read-only operation with no side effects or specifying response structure, rate limits, or authentication requirements.

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 short and front-loaded with the purpose. The Args section is efficiently formatted with one sentence per parameter. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) but is effective as-is.

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 tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the core purpose. It does not need to explain return values due to output schema. However, for a job status tool, it could briefly note that the response includes status field, but not required.

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 adds essential meaning. It explains that 'job_id' is numeric and visible in the GitLab UI URL, and 'project_path' is in format 'group/project' with a default from environment variable. This is clear and helpful.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'get' and resource 'current status of a GitLab CI job by ID'. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'gitlab_list_jobs' (which lists multiple jobs) and 'gitlab_poll_job' (which polls for completion).

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?

Description implies usage for retrieving a single job's status but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'gitlab_poll_job' or 'gitlab_cancel_job'. No guidance on prerequisites or conditions.

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