comfy_cli_jobs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It mentions the tool interacts with comfy-cli and covers local and cloud jobs, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., cancellation consequences), authentication needs, rate limits, or what 'watching' entails.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core actions and scope. Second sentence clarifies local jobs. Every word adds value; no fluff.

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 8 parameters, 5 actions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It lacks details on what each action (e.g., wait vs watch) does, parameter usage constraints, and expected behavior. A more comprehensive description is warranted for a tool of this complexity.

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 only 13% (only workspace has a description). The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema enums provide. It fails to explain the roles of limit, all, promptId, promptIds, timeoutSeconds, or how they interact with actions.

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, inspects, waits for, watches, or cancels local or Comfy Cloud jobs via comfy-cli. It differentiates from siblings by covering a broad set of job-related actions, and specifies that local jobs include CLI-tracked async submissions and ComfyUI queue/history.

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 over sibling tools like cancel_job, get_job_status, or get_queue. The description implies it is a general-purpose job manager but does not provide criteria for choosing it over more specific tools.

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