get_job

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the transparency burden. It discloses that the return includes the job's full description, but it does not mention other behavioral aspects such as read-only status, auth requirements, rate limits, or potential errors. For a simple getter, this is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 highly concise: one sentence stating the purpose, followed by a brief Args section. The main purpose is front-loaded, and every word earns its place. No unnecessary repetition or fluff.

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 simplicity (one parameter, clear purpose) and the presence of an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers what the tool does and the parameter. It does not address error cases or non-usage scenarios, but these are less critical for a single-job retrieval tool.

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 description explains that job_id is 'the unique numeric identifier of the job,' adding semantic meaning beyond the schema's type integer and title. This clarifies the purpose and uniqueness of the parameter, which is the only parameter. The added meaning compensates for the empty schema description.

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 'Get detailed information about a specific job, including its full description,' which clearly identifies the verb (get), the resource (job), and the scope (specific job by ID). The explicit mention of 'full description' adds specificity and distinguishes it from search_jobs, which is a search/filter operation.

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 implies usage for retrieving a specific job, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over search_jobs or provide exclusions or prerequisites. The context is clear enough for basic use, but guidance on when not to use it is missing.

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