get_job_definition

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool returns the 'original submitted YAML job definition,' implying a read operation, but lacks details about error conditions (e.g., nonexistent job), authentication needs, or the exact format of the returned YAML. For a simple retrieval, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 directly states the tool's purpose. It has no unnecessary words or details, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 low complexity (one parameter, output schema exists), the description is nearly complete. It specifies the output is the original submitted YAML job definition. However, it lacks any context about when to use this tool versus other siblings, which slightly reduces completeness.

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 0%, and the description does not clarify the job_id parameter beyond what the schema provides (integer, required). It does not explain where to obtain the job_id or any constraints on its value (e.g., must be an existing job). The description should compensate for low coverage but fails to do so.

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 it retrieves the original submitted YAML job definition for a job. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and specifies the exact resource ('original submitted YAML job definition'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_job (which likely returns metadata) and get_job_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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, conditions, or when not to use it. Given siblings like get_job, get_job_logs, and get_job_results, explicit differentiation would be helpful but is absent.

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