wejob_search_companiesSearch public WeJob company profiles.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | Optional public result sort order. | |
| limit | No | Maximum number of results. | |
| query | No | Search query. | |
| location | No | Location filter. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| results | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / sortAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Optional public result sort order.",
+ "enum": [
+ "newest",
+ "oldest",
+ "deadline_soon",
+ "deadline_later",
+ "price_asc",
+ "price_desc",
+ "smallest",
+ "largest",
+ "founded_newest",
+ "founded_oldest",
+ "most_jobs"
+ ],
+ "type": "string"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds no behavioral context (e.g., pagination, data consistency, result availability), providing minimal extra value.
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 no wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded and immediately comprehensible.
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 4 optional parameters and an output schema, but the description is minimal. It does not explain how search results are filtered or sorted, though the output schema partially compensates. Adequate but could be more complete.
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 100% with each parameter documented. The description does not add further meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.
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 'Search public WeJob company profiles' clearly states the verb (search) and resource (company profiles), directly distinguishing it from sibling tools for formations and 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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like wejob_search_formations or wejob_search_jobs, nor any context on prerequisites or exclusions.
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.