job_status

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While the tool is clearly a read-only status check, the description does not disclose expected outcomes, error conditions, or any side effects. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond what the tool name implies.

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 appropriately concise and front-loaded, using a single sentence to convey the core purpose. It is not padded with unnecessary information, though it could benefit from slight elaboration without losing conciseness.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, output schema provided), so the description covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks contextual guidance about when to call it relative to other job-related tools and what to expect from the output, making it only minimally complete for the given complexity.

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 input schema has a single parameter 'uuid' with no description, and the tool description also fails to explain that this is the job ID. Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not compensate by clarifying the parameter's meaning or format.

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's function: retrieving the current Tapis status of a submitted job. It identifies the resource (submitted job) and the specific aspect (status), which is sufficient to distinguish it from related tools like get_results, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'retrieve'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_my_jobs or get_results. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or a preferred context, leaving the agent to infer usage purely from the tool name.

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