List bulk verification jobs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns jobs most recent first, includes status/progress/summary, and supports filtering/pagination. The 'List' verb implies a read-only operation with no side effects, which is adequate for a simple list tool. It doesn't mention rate limits or authentication, but these are not critical for a list operation.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and includes only essential information. No redundant details.

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 tool is simple, with 3 optional parameters and no output schema. The description covers purpose, ordering, filters, and gives use-case guidance. It mentions the output fields (status, progress, summary) partially compensating for the missing output schema. Overall, it's complete for this level of complexity.

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 100%, so the schema already fully documents all three parameters. The description adds a high-level statement about filtering and pagination, but doesn't add details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the tool as a list operation for bulk verification jobs, specifying what it returns (status, progress, summary) and the ordering. It distinguishes from siblings like get_job_status by focusing on listing multiple jobs and providing job_ids.

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 explicitly states 'Use this to find past jobs and their job_ids,' giving a clear use case. It also mentions optional status filtering and pagination, providing context for when to use these features. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives like get_job_status for specific job lookups.

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