pbs_jobs_list

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

With no annotations, the description reveals it is a read operation, raises an error on invalid job_type, returns job configs, and requires specific configuration. This covers key behavioral traits 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 concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the purpose. It contains no redundant information, though structuring with bullet points could improve readability.

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 an existing output schema, the description covers output (returns jobs with configs), error behavior, and prerequisites. It does not mention pagination or target-specific listing, but these are minor omissions.

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 schema description coverage is 50% (proximo_target described), but the description adds crucial meaning for job_type by listing valid values (sync|verify|prune). This compensates for the schema's lack of description for job_type.

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 'List all PBS scheduled jobs of the given type (read)', specifying the verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools like pbs_job_create or pbs_job_run by indicating it is a read-only list 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 provides valid values for job_type (sync|verify|prune) and notes the config requirement (PROXIMO_PBS_*). However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, though as the only list tool for jobs, confusion is minimal.

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