get_job

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It states what is returned ('full spec and status') but does not mention potential 404s, namespace defaulting behavior, permissions required, or any side effects. This is minimal transparency for a read operation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to identifying the tool's purpose.

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 get-by-ID tool with no output schema, the description adequately states the scope ('full spec and status') and distinguishes it from sibling resource-specific getters. It could add a note about namespace or error behavior, but the core selection information is present.

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 only references 'by ID,' adding meaning for the required id parameter but leaving the optional namespace parameter completely unexplained. With two parameters, the description should compensate for the schema gap, but it does not address namespace.

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 'Get' and names the exact resource: 'full spec and status of a single Nomad job by ID.' It clearly differentiates from siblings like list_jobs (plural/list) and get_job_allocations (nested resource).

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 phrase 'single Nomad job by ID' implies the tool should be used when the agent already has a job ID and needs the job's spec/status, contrasting with list_jobs for enumeration. It does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, but the usage context is fairly clear.

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