list_jobs

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'matching the given filters'. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, how pagination works, or any other behavioral specifics. The description is insufficient for understanding 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 a single short sentence, which is concise. However, given the complexity of 14 parameters, it is under-specified and could benefit from more structure or detail while remaining concise.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description fails to provide context about pagination, sort order, or the meaning of 'filters'. For a tool with many optional parameters, the description is too brief to be complete.

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%, and the description does not explain any of the 14 parameters. The phrase 'given filters' is generic and does not link to specific parameters, adding no semantic value beyond the parameter names.

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 jobs matching the given filters' clearly states the action (list jobs) and indicates filtering capability, establishing a clear purpose. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like list_jobs_overview or find_jobs_by_setting, which could have similar roles.

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. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the AI agent without context for selection.

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