Get job configuration

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

Describes a read operation with no side effects, but does not disclose any behavioral traits like idempotency, required permissions, or rate limits. With no annotations, the description provides minimal added transparency beyond the obvious.

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?

Single sentence, no redundancy, efficiently conveys purpose and included content. Every word earns its place.

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 get-by-id tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers the main purpose and content. Could hint at return format, but not necessary given the straightforward nature.

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?

Input schema covers the single parameter jobId with description 'Job ID (GUID) from list_jobs'. The tool description adds no further semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score 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?

Clearly states the tool retrieves the full configuration of a single job by ID, listing key included fields (schedule, virtual objects, storage, retention), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_jobs or update_job.

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?

Implies usage for fetching detailed configuration of a specific job, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like list_jobs (which returns a list) or get_job_objects (which returns only objects). No exclusions or context provided.

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