list_jobs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only says 'List all jobs' without disclosing any additional behavioral traits such as read-only nature, pagination, ordering, return format, or required permissions. The description adds no context beyond what the tool name already 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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word earns its place, and there is zero redundancy.

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, but with no output schema and no annotations, the description should at least indicate what 'jobs' are and what the list returns (e.g., job IDs, names, statuses). It does not provide enough contextual detail for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior or result structure.

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 compensate for the params. It mentions 'in a specific repository' but does not explain what 'repository_location' or 'repository_name' mean (e.g., URL, path, identifier). The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory but lack crucial detail about the expected values.

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 'List all jobs in a specific repository' uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('jobs') with a clear scope ('specific repository'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_repositories and list_assets, which target different resources.

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 only implies that a repository must be specified, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide prerequisites (e.g., 'Use list_repositories to find repository names'). There are no exclusions or alternative tool references.

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