infomaniak_nodejs_app_jobs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds useful behavioral context: JWT-protected log_stream endpoints and Manager-private access, which are not conveyed by annotations. No contradiction.

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?

Description is a single sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose, scope, key output features, and access context. No wasted words.

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?

Despite having an output schema (not shown), the description fails to document parameter semantics, which is a significant gap since both parameters are required. It provides high-level purpose but lacks details needed 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?

Input schema has two required parameters (hosting_id, vhost_route_id) with no descriptions, and schema_description_coverage is 0%. The description does not mention or explain these parameters, leaving the agent to guess their meaning for the job listing context.

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 clearly states the tool lists recent jobs (builds, restarts) for a Node.js app, including status and JWT-protected log_stream endpoint per job. It distinguishes from siblings like infomaniak_nodejs_app_logs (logs) and infomaniak_nodejs_app_status (current status) by specifying 'recent jobs' and specific job types.

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 mentions 'Manager-private' indicating access restrictions, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like infomaniak_nodejs_app_logs or infomaniak_nodejs_app_status. It implicitly suggests use for viewing historical job records, but lacks clear when-not or alternative references.

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