Get import jobs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description's GET/no-body note adds limited behavioral context. It provides no additional disclosure about authentication, rate limits, response shape, or pagination behavior beyond what the input schema mentions.

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 short and front-loaded with the purpose and endpoint, followed by body and reference details. It is slightly redundant with the title ('Get import jobs') and the reference URL may be unnecessary, but overall it is compact and scannable.

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 simple read-only list operation with no required parameters, the endpoint, body note, and reference link provide enough to invoke the tool. The schema covers query parameters and pagination explicitly, so the absence of an output schema does not make the description incomplete for calling the tool correctly.

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 100% because the query parameter includes documented names and pagination semantics. The tool description itself adds no parameter meaning, only 'Body fields: none,' so the high-coverage baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 operation ('Get import jobs') and gives the exact endpoint 'GET /api/xm/1/imports', so an agent knows what resource is accessed. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling 'xmatters_get_an_import_job', though the plural name and endpoint imply a list operation.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as xmatters_get_an_import_job or xmatters_get_import_job_messages. It notes 'Body fields: none' and provides a reference link, but does not state prerequisites, exclusions, or selection criteria.

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