get_job

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. Discloses return types (kubectl stdout, Helm output, error message) but lacks info on auth, rate limits, or error handling for missing jobs.

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?

Five sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage, then parameter detail. No redundant or missing information. Efficiently structured.

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 no output schema, description adequately describes return values (details, result including stdout, Helm output, error message). Parameter is fully covered. Could mention response format but sufficient for a simple get operation.

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%, but description adds meaning by specifying job_id accepts 'Full UUID or short ID (first 8 characters)', which is helpful beyond the schema's plain string type.

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?

Clearly states it returns details and results of a specific operation. Differentiates from list_jobs and other get_* siblings by emphasizing result output, but does not explicitly distinguish from get_job_evaluations or get_job_metrics.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call this to check whether a previously submitted action succeeded or failed, and to retrieve its output.' Provides clear when-to-use but does not mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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