Return salary stats for active Remoote jobs matching supported filters when enough normalized compensation data exists.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | No | ||
| region | No | ||
| skills | No | ||
| country | No | ||
| seniority | No | ||
| company_id | No | ||
| location_tag | No | ||
| exclude_skills | No | ||
| employment_type | No | ||
| salary_required | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions the condition 'when enough normalized compensation data exists,' which is a useful behavioral note. However, it lacks details on authentication, rate limits, or response format.
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 at one sentence and front-loaded with the action. It could be expanded to cover key parameters or use cases without becoming verbose.
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?
No output schema, so the description should hint at return values (e.g., aggregated stats). It does not. With 10 parameters and no behavioral annotations, the description is insufficient for an agent to use the tool effectively.
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%, yet the description provides no param-level details. With 10 parameters, the description should clarify their roles beyond the schema (e.g., what 'query' means). The current description is inadequate.
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 it returns salary stats for active Remoote jobs with filters, distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_jobs and get_job which focus on individual job listings. However, it could specify what statistics are returned (e.g., median, range).
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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description references 'supported filters' but does not elaborate on which filters are supported or provide context for selecting this tool over search_jobs or get_top_jobs.
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.
