jobDefinition_get

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses return content (activity details, process definition, suspension state) which substitutes for missing output schema. However, it lacks disclosure on safety (read-only nature), side effects, or permissions despite the mutation-sounding siblings present.

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?

Two efficient sentences with zero waste. Front-loaded with the action verb 'Retrieve'. First sentence defines the operation, second defines the return payload—every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple retrieval tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers return values. However, gaps remain: no mention of where to source the ID (prerequisite from jobDefinition_list), and the discrepancy between 'by ID' text and empty input schema leaves invocation context incomplete.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, triggering baseline score of 4. However, note that the description mentions 'by ID' while the schema is empty, which could confuse invocation but does not lower the semantic score under the rubric.

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?

Clear verb (Retrieve), resource (job definition), and scope (single by ID). Distinguishes from siblings jobDefinition_list (plural) and jobDefinition_setSuspension (modification) through explicit scope, though it does not explicitly name these alternatives.

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?

States what data is returned (activity details, process definition, suspension state), implying when to use it, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus jobDefinition_list or how to obtain the required ID.

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