descartar_job

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It states the action is immediate but does not clarify whether the discard is permanent, reversible, or has side effects. For a destructive operation, this lacks necessary transparency.

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 sentence that front-loads the action and the key identifier. It is concise and contains no filler.

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?

While the basic action is clear, the description omits context such as prerequisites, what happens after discarding, and how this relates to sibling tools. The lack of guidance on when to discard versus querying or extracting text leaves the description incomplete for safe and correct use.

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?

The schema has zero description coverage for the job_id parameter, and the description only says 'identified by the job_id,' which merely restates the parameter name. No format, source, or constraints are provided, so the description does not compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 a specific verb ('discard') and a specific resource ('temporary derivative identified by the job_id'), clearly distinguishing this tool from its siblings like 'consultar_job' (query) and 'obter_texto_desidentificado' (get text).

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 usage is implied by the action: if you have a job_id and want to discard its temporary derivative, this tool is appropriate. However, there is no explicit mention of when not to use it or alternatives, such as querying the job first or waiting for completion.

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