List PBS Tasks

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive hints. The description adds useful context beyond annotations: it specifies the return fields and constrains results to 'recent' tasks. This is valuable behavioral disclosure.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear first sentence, a compact Args block, and a Returns line. Every sentence serves a purpose, with no fluff or repetition.

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 list operation, the description is complete: it names the resource, parameters, and return shape. It does not over-explain pagination or sorting, which is acceptable given the schema covers limit constraints. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by the explicit return description.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description repeats parameter info and also matches the schema's examples for typefilter and statusfilter, adding no new semantic value. The only marginal addition is the default/max for limit, already present in the 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('recent tasks on the PBS node') and clearly states what is returned (UPID, type, user, start/end times, status). It implicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools that target specific job types like sync or verify jobs.

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 general use for listing all tasks, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus dedicated listers like pbs_list_sync_jobs or pbs_list_verification_jobs. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided, though the examples of type filters suggest filtering capabilities.

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