modify_jobs

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

No annotations provided. The description informs that the tool requires WRITE permission and performs linking/unlinking, but it does not disclose behavioral details such as what happens to existing associations, whether the operation is reversible, or any side effects. The schema's action enum descriptions provide minimal clarity, but the description itself is insufficient.

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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous information. Every word contributes to stating the tool's purpose and permissions.

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 and fully described parameters, the description is too sparse. It omits any mention of return values, prerequisites, or behavioral context that would help an agent understand the tool's full operation. The tool's mutation nature and lack of annotations increase the need for more completeness.

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% with verbose parameter descriptions that fully explain each parameter's role. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 links or unlinks jobs, specifying the resource (jobs) and action. It distinguishes from siblings like query_jobs (read) by implying write operations, although it does not explicitly differentiate from other modify tools.

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 includes a permission hint (WRITE permission) but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like modify_changelists, which might also handle job associations. No exclusions or context are given.

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