List render jobs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it returns recent jobs and a running count, which is helpful context, but does not disclose other behavioral aspects like pagination limits or ordering details. With annotations covering the main traits, this adds some value but not extensive disclosure.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the main action first, then the additional information, and ends with the intended purpose. It is concise, efficient, and free of any filler. Every word contributes to meaning.

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 list tool with no parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering safety, the description is complete. It clearly states what the tool returns (recent jobs and running count) and the purpose. It doesn't need to explain the data format since the title and name make the resource type clear. A 4 is appropriate as it covers the essentials.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty with 100% coverage. Per the rubric, the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and adds nothing beyond that baseline.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('render jobs'), and adds the distinct capability of reporting how many are currently running. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling get_job (singular) and other job-related tools like list_youtube_report_jobs. An agent can infer exactly what to expect.

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 gives a use case ('so you can report on or resume in-flight work') which implies when to use it. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like get_job for a specific job's details, nor does it state when not to use this tool. The guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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