infomaniak_nodejs_app_jobs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful context beyond these: 'Manager-private' indicates access control, and 'JWT-protected log_stream endpoint per job' reveals a detail about the response. This adds behavioral transparency without contradicting annotations.

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 that is front-loaded with the key purpose. It includes essential information (jobs, status, log_stream endpoint, manager privacy) without any 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?

The description covers the main purpose and mentions the output element (log_stream endpoint), and an output schema exists which helps. However, it lacks explanation of the required parameters and does not reference related tools, leaving some contextual gaps for a tool that requires two identifiers to invoke correctly.

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% and the description does not explain the meaning or purpose of hosting_id or vhost_route_id. The parameter names are not self-explanatory, and the description does not mention them at all, leaving the agent without guidance on how to populate these required fields.

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 a specific verb ('List') and specifies the resource ('recent jobs that ran for a Node.js app') with examples ('builds, restarts, etc.'). It also mentions the output includes status and a JWT-protected log_stream endpoint, making it distinct from sibling tools like status or logs.

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 clear context (listing jobs for a Node.js app) and indicates it is 'Manager-private', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as infomaniak_nodejs_app_status or infomaniak_nodejs_app_logs. No exclusions or comparative guidance is given.

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