list_queue_jobs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'list' and 'optional filtering'; it does not mention authentication requirements, pagination behavior, ordering, or result format. 'List' implies read-only, but that is not explicit and there is no output schema.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It communicates the core operation and filtering capability efficiently, even if it is too brief operationally.

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?

With 11 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is too thin. It does not establish Clockwork connection/auth expectations, result ordering, pagination behavior, or how this listing relates to get_queue_job. An agent would need to infer too much to invoke it confidently.

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 100%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description's 'optional filtering' generically aligns with the filter parameters but adds no extra meaning about how they interact or about pagination behavior.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' and the resource 'queue jobs', with 'optional filtering' adding the key behavior. It is clearly about listing rather than getting a single job, though it does not explicitly contrast with the get_queue_job sibling.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus get_queue_job, list_commands, or other siblings. The intended context must be inferred from the tool name and sibling list, with no mention of prerequisites such as connecting to Clockwork first.

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