pbs_jobs_list

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It correctly labels itself 'READ-ONLY' and states it returns all jobs with configs and raises on invalid job_type. It does not mention pagination, ordering, or rate limits, but for a simple list tool this is adequate.

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, front-loaded purpose, no filler. Every sentence adds value: purpose+valid values, return+error behavior, sibling references, config requirement. Perfectly concise.

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 has two parameters, high schema coverage, and an output schema exists, the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, valid inputs, return value, error handling, and relationship to other tools. An agent can reliably use this tool with the provided 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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. The description lists valid job_type values (sync, verify, prune) which are already in schema, and implies date-range filtering via 'scheduled jobs of the given type' but no extra semantics beyond schema. The proximo_target parameter is already well-described in schema.

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 tool lists all PBS scheduled jobs by type (sync, verify, prune). It distinguishes from sibling tools that manage individual jobs (create, update, delete) and other list tools (e.g., pbs_tasks_list). The verb 'list' and resource 'PBS scheduled jobs' are specific and unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly tells when to use ('list all PBS scheduled jobs') and when not to ('use pbs_job_create, pbs_job_update, or pbs_job_delete to manage'). It also mentions it raises on invalid job_type and requires PROXIMO_PBS_* config. No misleading guidance.

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