get_job_stage

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does declare the safety profile ('Read-only') and describes the returned payload, which is the key behavioral disclosure for a lookup tool. It omits any note on auth/permissions or error behavior for an invalid ID, keeping it below a 5.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the verb/resource, then the safety label, then the return fields and the sibling recommendation. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

An output schema exists, so the return-value enumeration is supplementary rather than required, and the description still covers what matters for invoking the tool correctly. It is complete for a simple read, though it could note the invalid-ID/error case.

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% and the single parameter already documents its origin ('get from list_job_stages_for_job'). The description adds no format or lookup detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a single stage by ID') and enumerates what is returned (name, sort_order, job_id, interviews). It also names the sibling tool list_job_stages_for_job, so an agent can distinguish this single-stage fetch from the list variant without opening either schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: 'Usually list_job_stages_for_job is more useful — it gives all stages in pipeline order.' This is clear conditional guidance toward the alternative. It stops short of stating when a single-stage fetch IS the right call (e.g., when the ID is already known), so it is not fully bidirectional guidance.

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