tolly_job_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the fee formula and minimum unlock price, the gated-visibility behavior, and that all returned text is untrusted. It omits failure behavior for malformed jobIds and how long/complete the 'short preview' is.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the verb and the return contents; the pricing parenthetical and the untrusted-text warning each earn their place. Slightly dense but no 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 one-parameter read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers content, pricing semantics, gated visibility, and trust posture. Only edge-case behavior (invalid id, empty deliveries) is left unspecified.

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 single jobId parameter is undocumented in the description (0% schema description coverage), though the schema's regex pattern ^jb_[0-9a-f]{20}$ already constrains the format. The description adds no meaning beyond what the schema supplies, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read one job') and then enumerates exactly what comes back: the brief, deliveries, agent, price, all-in unlock price, and preview. The scope (single job, by id) is unambiguous against list-oriented siblings like tolly_jobs_search.

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?

Signals cost ('free') and the key usage condition: results stay hidden until the poster unlocks, with the alternative named ('tolly_job_unlock'). It does not say how to obtain a jobId or when to prefer tolly_jobs_search first, so it falls just short of explicit when/when-not guidance.

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