get_sync_job

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It only states that it gets status and details, which implies a read operation, but it does not disclose whether any permissions are required, what happens if the job does not exist, or that the operation has no side effects.

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 directly states the purpose and lists the arguments, making it front-loaded and free of unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for the simple tool.

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?

While the tool has only 2 required string parameters and an output schema, the description lacks any usage context, such as whether job_uuid is globally unique or project-scoped, and it does not mention error behavior or when to prefer this over list_sync_jobs.

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 description repeats the parameter names and their types (UUIDs) from the schema without adding any additional meaning, such as the relationship between project_uuid and job_uuid or how to specify the job. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fails to compensate.

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 explicitly states 'Get status and details of a synchronization job' with a clear verb ('get') and resource ('sync job'), and the inclusion of job_uuid distinguishes it from list_sync_jobs. It concisely conveys the tool's purpose.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus list_sync_jobs or create_sync_job, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The agent cannot infer appropriate usage from the description alone.

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