Get Job Log

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the 'completed job' pre-condition, which is useful context, but does not disclose additional behaviors such as what happens when the job is still running or whether logs are truncated.

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 a single, clear sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, making it immediately scannable for an agent.

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 one-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema and comprehensive annotations, the description is sufficiently complete. The 'completed job' qualifier and simple job_id parameter leave little ambiguity about invocation.

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%, with job_id documented as 'ID of the job.' The description adds only the 'completed job' qualifier and does not elaborate on job_id format or provenance, but with full schema coverage the 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 states a clear action ('Retrieve') on a specific resource ('the log') with a scope qualifier ('of a completed job'). It is distinct enough from siblings like get_job_status or list_jobs, though it does not explicitly call out the 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?

The description implies the tool is for completed jobs, which gives some usage context. However, it does not explicitly mention when to avoid using it or suggest alternatives such as get_job_status for active jobs.

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