Get HyperExecute Job Scenarios

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

No annotations provided, but the description fully discloses read-only nature and explains error behaviors: distinguishes between 'no scenarios match filter' and 'job not found' errors. This provides critical behavioral transparency beyond basic read-only hint.

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?

Every sentence adds value: first sentence summarizes output, second details parameters, third explains important error distinction. No redundant or vague language. Front-loaded with main purpose.

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 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers input semantics, pagination, filter behavior, error differentiation, and output fields. It is complete enough for an AI agent to use the tool correctly without additional documentation.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description adds comprehensive meaning: explains job_id as required and shared with another tool, limit with max 20 and default 10, cursor for pagination (ID-based), status and search_text filters with error handling for no matches.

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 it lists scenario-level execution details for a HyperExecute Job, specifying exact fields like scenario ID, parent Task ID, name, iteration, status, group, and duration. It distinguishes from sibling tools like tm.get_hyperExecuteJobById and tm.get_hyperExecuteJobSessions by focusing on scenarios.

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 indicates when to use this tool (to get scenario details for a job) and specifies required input (job_id) and optional filters/pagination. It could explicitly mention when not to use or compare to alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an AI agent.

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