get_pa_job

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, which convey safety and idempotency. The description adds only the resource type 'collection job', but no additional behavioral traits beyond annotations. It does not contradict annotations.

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 sentence of 10 words, front-loaded with verb and resource. It is maximally concise with no extraneous information, earning a top score.

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 tool is straightforward with 1 parameter and annotations covering safety, the description is barely adequate. It lacks details on output format or error behavior, but is not critically incomplete for this simple case.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters with a description for sys_id. The tool description does not add any extra meaning or context about the parameter (e.g., format, source). 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?

The description uses 'Get details of a Performance Analytics collection job', which clearly identifies the verb and resource. It distinguishes among sibling tools like list_pa_jobs or get_pa_indicator by specifying 'collection job', but does not explicitly differentiate from other PA detail tools.

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. It does not mention that list_pa_jobs is for listing, or when not to use this tool. Explicit usage context is missing.

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