list_jobs

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry the burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, or safety guarantees. A simple 'List all jobs' implies read-only, but no explicit confirmation.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then return details, then usage guidance. Every sentence adds value with 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?

Covers the return fields and usage, but lacks details about the optional 'env' parameter, potential filtering, or limits. With an output schema present, the return structure is partially covered, but missing information reduces completeness.

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 has one optional parameter 'env' with 0% coverage. The description does not mention this parameter at all, failing to compensate for the missing schema details.

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 it lists all jobs across all code locations, with a specific verb 'List' and resource 'jobs'. It distinguishes from siblings like get_runs by noting it returns job metadata needed for launch_job.

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 states 'When to use: as a starting point to explore what jobs exist, or to find the exact job name and repository_location needed for launch_job.' This provides clear usage context and even references a sibling tool.

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