Create a new job

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'create,' implying mutation, but lacks details on side effects, permissions, failure modes, or return behavior. The tip about editing a spec is helpful but not about behavior.

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 extremely concise: two sentences and a tip, each sentence serving a clear purpose. No fluff or redundancy.

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?

Given the single parameter and lack of output schema, the description is mostly adequate for input. However, it fails to specify what the tool returns (e.g., job ID or status), leaving the agent without complete context for using the result.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the schema already describes jobSpec. The description adds significant value by telling the agent to provide the full spec and how to obtain a template via get_job, which goes beyond the schema's generic description.

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 verb 'Create' and resource 'new backup/replication job', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from siblings like update_job or delete_job by focusing on creation.

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 provides a clear context for when to use (creating a job) and a practical tip to leverage get_job for a template. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or directly compare to sibling update_job for editing.

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