Retrieve recent Antigravity CLI jobs, optionally filtered by state or workflow, to inspect queued, running, completed, or failed tasks and track account activity.
List recent jobs, optionally filtered by state or workflow.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| state | No | ||
| workflow_id | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not disclose ordering, pagination behavior, what 'recent' means as a retention window, or any read-only guarantee, leaving real gaps for an agent deciding whether output is bounded.
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?
A single efficient sentence with the resource front-loaded and the optional filters trailing. Nothing is padded, though the brevity reflects under-specification rather than tight editing.
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 three-parameter list tool with no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema descriptions, the description is too thin. An agent has no guidance on result size, ordering, or pagination, which matters for a listing operation.
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%, so the description must compensate for all three parameters. It mentions the state and workflow filters but says nothing about 'limit' (default 50, max 500), the meaning of each enum value, or whether workflow_id accepts an ID versus a name.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('List recent jobs') with the scope narrowed to recent jobs. It does not differentiate from siblings like get_job_status or get_job_result, which retrieve single jobs, so an agent must infer the list-vs-get distinction.
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?
'optionally filtered by state or workflow' implies the conditions under which filtering applies, giving some usage context. It never states when to prefer this tool over get_job_status/get_job_result or list_sessions, and gives no exclusions or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.