aap_get_failed_jobs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds context about the returned fields (id, name, started, finished, elapsed, template name) and the filtering parameters, which enriches the behavioral understanding beyond the annotations. There is no contradiction.

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 compact and front-loaded: a one-line purpose, an example, a structured Args section, and a Returns section. Every sentence contributes useful information without extraneous text.

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 list tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and return format. It lacks explicit guidance on pagination or alternative tool selection, but it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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?

Although the schema has descriptions for each parameter, the context signal indicates 0% schema description coverage, so the description's explicit listing of hours, limit, and job_template with meanings and defaults compensates effectively. It clarifies the look-back window, result limit, and optional template filter, though it omits min/max bounds (present in schema).

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 starts with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('failed AAP jobs') and adds a time window scope ('within the last N hours'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like aap_list_running_jobs and aap_get_job_output, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 an example ('Show failed jobs from the last 24 hours') and details the hour/limit/template parameters, implying it is for listing recent failed jobs. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives like listing running jobs or querying job output, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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