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

With no annotations, the description takes on the transparency burden and directly discloses key behaviors: it returns capped public results, provides canonical Remoote URLs, and excludes raw employer apply URLs. It also narrows scope to 'active' remote jobs, which is useful. It does not cover other behaviors like authentication or rate limits, but the disclosed limitations are significant.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, each sentence adds meaningful value. No filler or redundancy.

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?

The tool has 11 parameters and no output schema, making it complex and in need of richer description. The description only mentions result capping and URL types, but fails to clarify expected return format, filter combinations, default behavior, or the meaning of salary_required. It is inadequate for correct agent selection and invocation.

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 coverage is only 18% (2 of 11 parameters described). The description compensates partially by explaining role_title and query, but the other 9 parameters (limit, region, skills, country, seniority, etc.) receive no guidance in either the schema or description. This is insufficient for such a high-parameter tool.

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 'Search active Remoote remote jobs', naming a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_job (specific job) and get_top_jobs by focusing on searching active remote jobs.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (searching jobs) and gives practical guidance on using role_title vs query. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the distinction from siblings is implicit through the word 'search'.

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