hpc_queue

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scope context (default filtering to the caller's own jobs) but says nothing about return format, columns, or pagination.

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?

A single short sentence with the scope qualifier front-loaded; nothing is wasted. It is arguably terse for a tool that lists structured output, but there is 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 simple read-only listing tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It omits what the queue listing actually contains and how the default scope can be changed, which an agent would benefit from knowing.

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%, so the schema alone does not explain user_only. The parenthetical "(your jobs by default)" does convey the parameter's meaning and default behavior, partially compensating for the gap, but it never states the parameter name or the opposite setting.

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 ("Show") and resource ("SLURM queue"), which is clearly distinct from sibling tools like hpc_job_details, hpc_job_history, and hpc_list_reservations. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings as alternatives, so it does not reach full differentiation.

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?

"your jobs by default" implies the scope can be widened and hints at when the default is not what you want, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no alternative tool is named. Usage must be inferred.

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