List Sub Jobs

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint) already indicate safe read-only behavior. The description adds value by detailing pagination (page, per_page) and response type (paginated JSON array with metadata), enhancing transparency beyond annotations.

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 concise (three sentences) and well-structured: purpose first, usage context, pagination details, required parameters, and API reference. No unnecessary 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?

For a simple list tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It covers the operation, pagination, required parameter, and response format, leaving no significant gaps.

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 100%, so parameters are fully defined. The description reinforces their purpose ('Use page and per_page to control pagination') and notes required parameters, but adds limited new semantic context beyond the schema.

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 the tool's function: 'Return a list of all Sub Jobs in a specified Project.' It identifies the resource (Sub Jobs) and action (list), and differentiates from related tools (create_sub_job, delete_sub_job, show_sub_job) by focusing on enumeration and pagination.

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 provides clear usage guidance: 'Use this to enumerate Work Breakdown Structure records when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters.' It includes required parameters and pagination control, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools.

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