lerobot_job_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must convey behavioral traits. It discloses the returned fields but does not indicate whether the tool has side effects, requires authentication, or can be called on jobs in any state. The behavioral transparency is adequate but minimal.

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 sentence with no extraneous information. It is concise and front-loaded with the key action and outputs.

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 presence of an output schema (context indicates true), the description does not need to detail return values. It lists the three fields returned (state, return code, output tails), which is sufficient for a basic understanding. However, it could hint at output tails being limited lines, but overall it is complete enough.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage on the single parameter job_id. The tool description does not add any additional meaning, e.g., explaining how to obtain job_id or its format. For a tool with one required parameter and no schema descriptions, the description should compensate 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 the tool returns state, return code, and output tails for a background job. It uses specific verbs ('Return') and specifies the resource ('background job'), distinguishing it from siblings like lerobot_job_logs and lerobot_list_jobs.

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 implies the tool is for checking job status, but it does not explicitly mention when to use it versus alternatives like lerobot_job_logs for detailed logs or lerobot_list_jobs for listing all jobs. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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