get_job_log

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It adds the constraint that the job must be completed, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like authentication requirements, log size limits, or whether the operation is read-only. 'Retrieve' implies read-only, but this is not explicit.

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, concise sentence with no filler words. It front-loads the verb and resource and delivers complete information efficiently.

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?

With an output schema present and only one parameter, the description adequately covers the core function. It could mention edge cases (e.g., behavior for non-completed jobs) or retention policies, but given the tool's simplicity and schema coverage, it is reasonably complete.

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?

The schema covers job_id with 100% description coverage ('ID of the job'). The description does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond implicitly referencing the job to retrieve. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents the parameter.

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 uses a specific verb (Retrieve) and resource (log of a completed job), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_job_status which retrieves status. The phrase 'completed job' adds precision about when the tool is applicable.

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 implies usage by specifying 'completed job', which suggests this tool is for logs after job completion. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives such as get_job_status for ongoing jobs.

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