List and monitor batch job statuses. Filter by state or date range to track progress.
List all batch jobs with their current status. Optionally filter by job states or time range.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| states | No | Filter by job states | |
| since | No | Filter jobs since timestamp (ISO 8601) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It states 'list', implying read-only, but does not disclose side effects, authorization needs, rate limits, or pagination behavior. The transparency is minimal.
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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the main purpose and optional parameters. Every word is necessary, with no redundancy or filler.
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?
For a simple listing tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic functionality. However, it lacks information about the response structure, which would be helpful since no output schema exists.
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 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents both parameters well. The description mentions filtering by states or time range, which adds little beyond the schema descriptions. It does not provide examples or format details.
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 tool name 'batch_list_jobs' and the description 'List all batch jobs with their current status' clearly specify the verb and resource. The optional filtering adds specificity, and the sibling tools (batch_submit_job, batch_download) differentiate this as a read-only listing operation.
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 mentions optional filters ('by job states or time range'), giving some context for usage. However, it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like batch_download, nor does it specify prerequisites or limits.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.