list_jobs

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states that jobs are 'persistent' and can be filtered by 'exact status', but doesn't clarify what 'persistent' means, whether it returns a snapshot, or if there are any side effects. The read-only nature is implied by 'List' but not explicitly guaranteed.

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?

One sentence with no wasted words. The verb 'List' is front-loaded and the optional filter is clearly stated.

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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter and an output schema exists, so the description doesn't need to explain return values. However, it lacks usage context and doesn't clarify what 'persistent' means, or when to prefer this over get_job_status, making it only partially 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds the meaning of 'exact status' for the status parameter, implying filtering by exact match, and the optionality via 'optionally'. However, it doesn't enumerate valid status values or explain the null default, leaving some ambiguity.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' and the resource 'persistent jobs', and mentions the optional status filter. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_job_status (which retrieves a single job's status) and cancel_job (which modifies job state).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. It doesn't mention scenarios like enumerating all active jobs or checking job history, nor does it suggest sibling tools like get_job_status for individual job details.

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