codex_native_jobs

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only, non-destructive operation but does not detail what 'durable' means, whether the call is blocking, or any rate limits. Adequate but minimal for safe invocation.

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 plus a usage hint, both front-loaded with essential information. No redundant words, every part earns its place.

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 lack of output schema, the description should explain what information is returned (e.g., job IDs, statuses). It only says 'List' but does not specify the return format or that it can filter by status. The usage hint is good but incomplete for full tool understanding.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the parameters 'limit' and 'status'. It does not explain that limit controls count or that status filters by job state. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'recent durable Codex Native jobs', distinguishing it from siblings that start, cancel, or check status. The usage hint 'Use after Claude restarts or when a job id was lost' adds specific purpose context.

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?

Provides explicit scenarios for when to use the tool ('after Claude restarts or when a job id was lost'), which helps differentiate from tools like codex_native_status or codex_native_result. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternatives.

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