list_job_line_items

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. The tier tag [tier: readonly-owner] adds useful access-level context. However, it doesn't describe pagination, ordering, or what fields are returned, though the endpoint mapping provides some expectation of a read-only 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?

Two sentences, zero waste. The endpoint mapping and tier tag are useful additions packed efficiently. Could arguably merge information more, but it's appropriately brief.

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 single-parameter read-only list tool, the description provides the essential targeting info (resource + endpoint + access tier). However, with no output schema and no documentation of return fields or pagination behavior, it's slightly under-specified for a list endpoint.

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 there's only one parameter (job_id) which is self-explanatory from the name. The description adds no meaning about the parameter beyond the schema, and with 0% coverage the description should compensate, though job_id is fairly unambiguous.

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 verb (List), the resource (all line items on a job), and maps to a specific REST endpoint (GET /jobs/{id}/line_items). It distinguishes reasonably from siblings like list_job_input_materials and list_job_appointments by being job-line-item-specific, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar list tools.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The tier tag [tier: readonly-owner] hints at access-level usage but doesn't explain context or exclusions. No mention of which jobs it applies to or prerequisites.

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