jobs_get

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

With no annotations available, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the basic action. It does not mention authentication requirements, return format, side effects, or any constraints (e.g., whether the job must be in a certain state). This leaves the agent with insufficient information to predict the tool's behavior.

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 extremely concise at one phrase. It is front-loaded with the core action. However, it could benefit from a slightly more structured format (e.g., separating the action from the resource), but it remains efficient and clear.

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 lack of an output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about expected results or behavior. It only explains what the tool does, not what to expect from it. For a retrieval tool, the agent needs to know what data fields will be returned, which is absent.

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% with both parameters described (project_id: 'The project ID', job_id: 'Managed job run ID'). The description adds no extra meaning beyond these schema descriptions, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Get a managed job run by id.' It specifies the verb (Get) and the resource (managed job run), and the phrase 'by id' distinguishes it from sibling tools like jobs_submit, jobs_cancel, and jobs_logs, which perform different actions on the same resource.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or conditions. The agent must infer usage solely from the tool's name and the sibling context.

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