query_jobs

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

The description states 'READ permission', which is useful given no annotations. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits like nondestructiveness, rate limits, or whether changes affect other data.

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?

Extremely concise: two brief clauses that front-load the verb and resource, with no extraneous words.

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 and the straightforward nature of a query tool, the description covers the main actions adequately. Missing details like permission levels or pagination behavior, but acceptable for a simple tool.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds minimal extra meaning (e.g., 'from changelist'), but does not significantly enhance understanding 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?

The description specifies the main actions (list jobs from changelist, get job details) and indicates read-only via 'READ permission'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools that operate on other resources like reviews or files.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like `query_reviews` or `modify_jobs`. No conditions or exclusions are mentioned.

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