cicd_gitlab_jobs

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

The description includes '[SAFE]' hinting it is non-destructive, but no annotations exist to confirm. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as rate limits, pagination, error handling, or return format.

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 at one sentence, with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with '[SAFE]'. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity.

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 simple nature of the tool (listing jobs), the description is insufficient. It omits that pipelineId is required, projectId is optional, and what the output contains. No output schema exists to compensate.

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%, and the description adds no meaning to the parameters 'projectId' and 'pipelineId'. It does not explain how to obtain these IDs or their optionality (projectId is not required but not mentioned).

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 action ('List') and the resource ('jobs') for a specific pipeline. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like cicd_gitlab_pipelines which list pipelines themselves. However, it lacks any additional context about the scope of listing (e.g., all jobs, pagination).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., cicd_gitlab_pipelines or cicd_github_workflow_runs). There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing a pipeline ID) or when not to use it.

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