list_jobs

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: results are ordered newest-first and pagination is supported. It does not cover details like auth, but the annotation lowers the bar and the added behavior is relevant.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the action, resource, scope, ordering, and pagination without waste.

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?

For a list operation, the description plus schema covers the required instance_id and optional pagination controls. There is no output schema, so a slightly fuller statement of what job fields are returned would help, but the overall shape is sufficient for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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 should compensate for parameter meaning. It gestures at 'for an instance' and 'pagination,' but does not explain the instance_id, limit, or offset semantics itself. The nested schema provides some field descriptions, but the tool description adds little value for parameter understanding.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('tracked jobs for an instance'), and adds ordering ('newest first') and pagination. This clearly separates list_jobs from sibling tools like list_instances, submit_job, poll_job, and cancel_job.

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 listing scenario is clear from 'List tracked jobs,' and the instance scoping plus pagination make the intended use obvious. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternatives, such as using submit_job to create a job or poll_job to check a specific job's status.

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