lc_get_job

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. However, it only states 'Fetch one service job' without indicating whether it is read-only, what happens if the job does not exist, or any permission requirements. This leaves critical behavioral gaps.

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 sentence, which is concise. However, it is too terse to be informative; it sacrifices clarity for brevity. A minimal viable description should at least hint at the required parameters or the context of 'service job'.

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 tool's simplicity (fetching a single resource) and the lack of output schema, the description should explain what a 'service job' is and clarify the parameters. It fails to do so, leaving the agent with insufficient context for correct invocation.

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 has two required parameters (oid, job_id) with 0% schema description coverage. The description adds no information about these parameters, such as their purpose or expected format. The agent has no guidance on what values to provide for oid or job_id.

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 'Fetch one service job' uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and clearly identifies the resource ('one service job'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'lc_list_jobs' (lists all jobs) and 'lc_wait_job' (waits for a job), making its purpose unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention siblings like 'lc_list_jobs' for retrieving multiple jobs or 'lc_wait_job' for monitoring job progress. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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