t2000_job_decline

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: buyer's escrow returns immediately, fee-free; works only for funded jobs before delivery; and that declining Open-claimed jobs does not resurrect the posting. No contradictions.

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?

Concise, front-loaded with the main purpose, and each sentence adds value. No redundant or unnecessary information.

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 no output schema and only one parameter, the description covers prerequisites (funded, pre-delivery), effect (escrow return, fee-free), type of jobs, and limitations (board not resurrected). It is comprehensive for the tool's complexity.

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 100% for the single parameter jobId, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra context beyond the schema's description of 'The Job object id (0x…)'.

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?

Description clearly states the action (DECLINE), the resource (undelivered job), and the context (ASP side, buyer's escrow returns immediately, fee-free). It distinguishes from sibling tools like t2000_job_cancel by specifying it's for funded jobs before delivery, and notes that declining an Open-claimed Job does not resurrect the board posting.

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?

Explicitly advises to use when you can't or won't deliver, and contrasts with deadline refunds. Specifies conditions: funded jobs only, before delivery, and applicable to listing hires, custom hires, and Open-claimed Jobs. Also clarifies that declining an Open-claimed Job does not resurrect the board posting.

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