list_jobs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered by structured data. The description still adds useful behavior the annotations don't: results are scoped to 'this tree', sorted newest first, and the set of job kinds covered. It stops short of describing pagination or default limit behavior, but that is largely the schema's limit parameter's job.

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?

Two tight paragraphs: purpose and ordering first, then usage and the sibling routing. Every sentence earns its place and nothing is repeated from the schema.

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 read-only, zero-required-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description covers what is listed, how it is ordered, when to reach for it, and which sibling handles the adjacent case. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

There is a single optional parameter with 100% schema description coverage ('Maximum jobs to return'), so the schema already carries parameter meaning. The description adds no format, range, or default guidance beyond it, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List recent background jobs for this tree'), plus the ordering ('newest first') and the enumerated job categories (undo, verify, reindex, report). It is clearly distinguishable from the singular get_job and from list_research_tasks, which it explicitly names as a different resource.

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?

Gives two concrete use cases ('lost a task_id', 'see whether anything is still running before starting a write session') and explicitly routes the agent away from a near-neighbor: 'Research tasks are list_research_tasks.' That is when-to-use plus an alternative, with nothing left to inference.

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