k8s_get_jobs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states what information is returned, but does not mention if the operation is read-only, required permissions, error cases, or behavior when no jobs exist. This leaves significant gaps for the agent.

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 two concise sentences, with no filler. It front-loads the core action and then adds specific output details. Every word contributes.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is somewhat complete for a simple list tool, mentioning key return fields. However, it lacks details on pagination, filtering beyond label_selector, and error handling. Adequate but not thorough.

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 0%, yet the description only adds value for the namespace parameter ('Omit namespace for all namespaces'). The context and label_selector parameters receive no explanation. The description does not compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 lists Kubernetes Jobs, specifying the exact information returned (completion status, active/succeeded/failed counts, timing). It is distinct from sibling tools like k8s_get_cronjobs which list a different resource type. The optional namespace usage is also clarified.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. No mention of alternatives like k8s_get_resources or k8s_get_cronjobs for related queries. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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