ecash_get_job

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get details' and does not mention error handling (e.g., job not found), return format, or whether the operation is read-only. This is minimal information beyond the tool name, leaving the agent with little insight into what happens on invocation.

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 a single, concise sentence with the key information front-loaded. Every word is relevant; there is no redundant or filler content.

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?

For a simple get-by-ID tool, the description is adequate for basic invocation, but with no output schema, the agent is left guessing what 'details' are included. The description does not describe the return structure or any edge cases, making it minimally viable rather than comprehensive.

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 input schema fully covers the single parameter with a description ('The ID of the job to retrieve'), and the description echoes 'by ID' without adding new semantic detail. Schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to compensate, giving a baseline of 3.

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 a specific action ('Get details') on a specific resource ('job') with a qualifier ('by ID'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ecash_create_job, ecash_accept_job, and ecash_submit_work, which perform different actions on jobs.

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 usage context is implied: use this tool whenever you need details of a job by its ID. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this over alternatives, nor any exclusions or preconditions. It is the only job-detail getter among siblings, so the absence is not harmful, but no explicit guidance is provided.

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