Inspect a print job

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so 'Does not print' is largely redundant with the structured safety profile. The description adds the useful domain framing of what selection semantics are applied, but says nothing about return shape, truncation at max_files, or whether results are capped.

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?

Two tight sentences: the capability first, the crucial disambiguating constraint second. Every clause earns its place with no filler.

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?

For a read-only preview tool with no output schema, annotations carry the safety burden and the description covers the selection surface. The main residual gap is the return shape (file list? match count? would-be page count?) given the print-job naming, but that is a minor omission.

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 coverage is only 57%, but the description names six of the seven selection mechanisms (paths, aliases, recursion, extension, glob, exclusion, date filters), effectively compensating for undocumented schema entries. Only max_files goes unmentioned in both places, though its 500/1000 bounds are self-explanatory.

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?

States a specific verb (previews) and enumerates what is being selected (files by path/alias/recursion/extension/glob/exclusion/date). The closing 'Does not print' cleanly separates it from print_paths and quick_print. It does not, however, explicitly differentiate itself from estimate_print_job, which is the closest conceptual sibling.

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 negative constraint 'Does not print' implicitly tells the agent when this tool is wrong (i.e., when actual printing is wanted), but no sibling is named and no positive trigger condition is given. The agent must infer that this is the dry-run/preview counterpart to the print tools.

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