list_jobs

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint false, closed-world), so the description's added value is the cross-client visibility note and the summary field inventory including elapsed_seconds and progress. It does not state ordering guarantees beyond "most recently updated" or how many jobs exist before truncation.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and scope, then a compact field list; every sentence is short and purposeful. The field enumeration is somewhat redundant given an output schema exists, but it reads efficiently.

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?

Because an output schema exists, the return-value inventory is largely duplicated effort, while the more consequential gap — how the three optional filters behave and whether they combine — goes unaddressed. The definition is serviceable but incomplete for a filtered listing 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load, yet it never explains the kind, status, or limit parameters as filters. The mention of "kind" and "status" describes fields in the returned summary, not the input filters, which risks being misread as if these parameters merely echo results.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List the most recently updated jobs") plus a scope qualifier ("including jobs submitted by another client") that no sibling covers. It also distinguishes itself from job_status, which handles single-job results and logs.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to job_status "for results and logs," establishing list_jobs as the discovery/browsing tool. It lacks an explicit statement of when not to use it (e.g., for a known job ID) and does not mention pagination or recency-window limits.

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