slurm_list_jobs

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It lists returned fields and parameters but omits details like default filtering behavior (e.g., what 'running and pending' means when state filter allows other values), pagination, auth needs, or whether jobs are scoped to the caller. Partial but not exhaustive.

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?

Two sentences for purpose and return fields, followed by a clear list of parameters. Front-loaded with the main action, no wasted words, and well-structured for quick scanning.

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 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return fields, and all parameters. It lacks default behavior if filters are omitted and does not mention pagination or limits, but is generally adequate for a list tool with good parameter descriptions.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates. Each parameter is described with its purpose and options (e.g., 'Filter by job state — RUNNING, PENDING, FAILED, COMPLETED'), providing essential context missing from 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 clearly states the tool lists Slurm jobs, specifies the verb 'list', the resource 'Slurm jobs', and even enumerates the returned fields (job ID, name, state, etc.), differentiating it from siblings like 'get_job' or 'list_jobs' by focusing on Slurm-specific jobs.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as 'list_jobs' or 'slurm_get_job_status'. While the Slurm-specific name hints at context, there is no mention of when not to use it or any exclusions.

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