Retrieve queue jobs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the underlying REST route (GET /queues/{name}/jobs) and does not describe result volume, pagination, or what a job entry contains.

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?

Very short and front-loaded, with the functional sentence appearing immediately. The opening line duplicates the title verbatim, which is mild waste, but the rest is efficient.

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?

No output schema exists, so the burden of describing what is returned falls on the description, and it never explains the shape of a queue job object or result size. For a simple read tool with full annotation and schema coverage this is adequate but leaves a real gap.

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 100% and both parameters (name enum, status enum array) are documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only the phrase 'specified queue', contributing no syntax or filtering semantics beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: retrieving a list of queue jobs from a named queue. It is clear what it returns, but it does not distinguish itself from close siblings like immich_get_queue, immich_get_queues, or immich_empty_queue, which an agent must disambiguate on its own.

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 offers no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives. It never mentions the optional status filter or when filtering would be appropriate, leaving the agent to infer that this lists jobs after discovering a queue via immich_get_queues.

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