Manage SCAPS jobs

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false, and openWorld=false. The description adds that a finished job contains its full result and that cancel is possible, but it does not explain cancellation side effects, blocking behavior beyond wait_seconds, or permissions.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action menu and a useful note about finished-job results. No text is wasted.

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 an output schema and annotations, the description needn't explain return values or safety. It still leaves gaps about job lifecycle, action-specific conditions, and how this differs from scaps_results/scaps_status, so it is adequate but not complete.

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 coverage is 75%, with descriptions for action, job_id, and wait_seconds; the description loosely maps 'recent runs' to limit and 'one' to job_id, but does not add format or constraints beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does most of the work.

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 specifies the resource (recent runs/jobs) and the operations (list, get/status, wait, cancel), so an agent can infer what the tool does. It does not name or distinguish sibling tools such as scaps_results or scaps_status, so it falls short of 5.

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 action list implies the available modes, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives such as when to use this versus scaps_results. The agent must infer usage from the enum and schema.

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