slurm_get_job_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the fallback behavior (squeue then sacct) and the host override. However, it does not describe output format, error handling, authentication needs, or rate limits, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 very concise: one sentence for purpose, one for behavior, and a bullet list for parameters. No redundant information, front-loaded purpose.

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 and no annotations, the description covers the essential behavior and parameter details. It lacks output format and error handling, but overall it is sufficiently complete for a simple retrieval tool.

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% (no parameter descriptions in schema). The description adds meaningful explanations for all three parameters: job_id, host (overrides env var), and gateway_id. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 retrieves status and resource usage for a specific Slurm job, distinguishing it from sibling tools like slurm_list_jobs (list jobs) or slurm_get_job_output (get output). The verb 'Get' and resource 'status and resource usage of a specific Slurm job' are clear and specific.

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 says it queries squeue for running/pending jobs and falls back to sacct for completed/failed jobs, giving some context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_job or slurm_list_jobs, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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