submit_job

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions returning new job id(s) but omits critical details: whether submission is synchronous or asynchronous, what happens on failure, if validation occurs, or any required permissions. The description is insufficient for safe agent invocation.

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 very concise: two sentences communicate the core action and return value. No extra words. However, it is perhaps too terse, sacrificing completeness for brevity. Still, it is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 importance of a submit action in a job lifecycle and the presence of many related siblings, the description fails to provide essential context. It does not explain where this tool fits in the workflow, what happens after submission, or how it interacts with other tools like get_job or cancel_job.

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% (no description on the 'definition' parameter). The description says 'YAML job definition' but does not elaborate on format, constraints, or examples. With no schema documentation, the description should provide more parameter context to aid correct input.

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 action (submit) and the resource (YAML job definition). It uses a specific verb and identifies what is being submitted. However, it does not distinguish from closely related siblings like validate_job or resubmit_job, which limits clarity for tool selection.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as validate_job or resubmit_job. The description does not include any context about prerequisites, conditions, or when not to use it.

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