myob_job_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The two-word description provides no information about authentication requirements, pagination behavior, whether the operation is read-only, or how the optional 'business_id' affects results. This is a critical gap for a list tool.

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 extremely concise (two words) but is under-specified rather than efficiently informative. It lacks any structural elements like parameter details or usage notes, making it too terse to be useful for an AI agent deciding whether and how to invoke the tool.

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 complexity (2 parameters, no annotations, an output schema not referenced in the description), the description is completely inadequate. It provides no context about what constitutes a 'job', how results are structured, or how the business_id parameter scopes the listing, leaving the agent with insufficient information.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description fails to mention either parameter ('top' or 'business_id'). The description does not compensate for the schema's lack of documentation, leaving an AI agent without semantic understanding of these parameters beyond their names.

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 clearly states the action ('List') and resource ('jobs'), making the basic purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling list tools like myob_invoice_list or myob_customer_list, which also follow the 'list <entity>' pattern.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., requiring an authorized business), and no context about selecting a specific business via the 'business_id' parameter. The description simply states the action without any usage context.

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