Create a user-confirmed Remoote apply redirect for an authenticated agent token. Requires the apply:intent scope and never returns raw employer apply URLs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| job_id | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It mentions the scope requirement and the fact that raw URLs are not returned, but it omits other important behaviors such as side effects (e.g., creating records), rate limits, authentication requirements beyond the scope, or error conditions. The description is insufficient for a mutation tool.
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 that front-loads the core purpose and includes key constraints. There is no redundant or unnecessary text, making it appropriately sized and efficient.
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 low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description provides a basic purpose and constraints. However, it lacks details about the 'user-confirmed' aspect, how the agent token is used, and the nature of the redirect. The information is adequate but not fully complete for an agent to use confidently.
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 input schema has one parameter, 'job_id', with type integer and exclusiveMinimum 0. The schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the description does not explain the parameter. The description adds no information about 'job_id' beyond what the schema already provides, failing to compensate for low coverage.
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 clearly states the tool creates a 'user-confirmed Remoote apply redirect' for an authenticated agent token, specifying a specific action and resource. However, it does not differentiate from siblings; the siblings are distinct in function (e.g., search, get), so the purpose is clear but could be more specific about what 'Remoote apply redirect' entails.
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 mentions the required scope ('apply:intent') and a behavioral constraint ('never returns raw employer apply URLs'), which provides usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it exclude any scenarios. The guidelines are present but minimal.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct action: fetching a single job, searching, salary stats, top jobs, creating an alert, and applying. Even search_jobs and get_top_jobs are differentiated by popularity vs. search criteria.
All tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (create_*, get_*, search_*). This makes the API predictable and easy to navigate.
Six tools cover the core job board functions without bloat or redundancy. The count feels well-scoped for a focused remote jobs API.
Core workflows (search, view, stats, alerts, apply) are covered. Missing update/delete for alerts and apply intents are minor gaps, but the main public-facing job retrieval is complete.
