List job types

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it's safe. The description adds value by describing the return content (service catalog with examples) and the filter parameter. It does not mention pagination or ordering, but for a simple catalog list this is acceptable.

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 sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states the action, second provides context and examples. Well-structured and front-loaded.

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 simplicity of the tool (one optional parameter, no output schema, clear annotations), the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, use cases, and return values. Minor omission: no mention of pagination or ordering, but not critical for this type of tool.

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 100% and the schema description already explains the status parameter. The description adds no additional parameter details beyond the schema, but the overall context of the tool's return values helps usage. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 job types and returns the business's service catalog. It provides examples (installation, repair, maintenance) and distinguishes from getJobType by emphasizing the list behavior and use cases like discovering job_type_id.

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 explicitly says to use it to discover job_type_id or render a services menu. While it doesn't mention when not to use it, the context is clear and the sibling tool getJobType is implied for single type lookup.

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