create_job

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states it 'Creates a Databricks job' and returns an ID. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits like required permissions, whether it's idempotent, error handling, or side effects, leaving significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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 appropriately sized with a clear purpose statement followed by structured Arg/Return sections. Every sentence adds value, but the 'Args' and 'Returns' labels are slightly redundant with schema fields, keeping it from a perfect score.

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 the tool's complexity (mutation with 3 params), no annotations, and an output schema (implied by 'Returns'), the description is minimally adequate. It covers basic purpose and parameters but lacks behavioral context and usage guidelines, making it incomplete for safe agent 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?

The description adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema: it explains that 'job_name' is for naming the job, 'package_name' refers to a Python package, and 'remote_wheel_path' is a path to an uploaded wheel file. This compensates well for the 0% schema description coverage, though it could detail format constraints.

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 action ('Creates a Databricks job') and specifies the key resources involved ('with the specified wheel and entry point'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'trigger_run' or 'upload_wheel', which prevents a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'trigger_run' or 'upload_wheel', nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., needing to upload a wheel first). It implies usage through the action but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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