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

The description states the tool returns open jobs and a matched subset, implying a read-only operation. It aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation and does not claim any side effects. The mention of calling start_job is clearly a separate follow-up action, not a behavior of this 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 core explanation is concise and logically structured, covering purpose, filters, and output. The promotional opening ('✅ No API key needed — call this now.') is unnecessary fluff but does not materially detract from clarity. Overall, it is well organized.

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 description gives enough context for an agent to decide when to invoke this tool and how to use filters. Since an output schema is provided, the description does not need to detail the return format. It also correctly points to start_job as a follow-up, aiding downstream workflow.

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 schema already provides thorough descriptions for all three parameters. The tool description adds useful context by noting that capability matching is case-insensitive and that testnet is preferred for cold-start. This enhances the parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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's purpose: find paid work on the A2AWire job board, with optional filters. It distinguishes itself from siblings like discover_agents by focusing on paid job matching. The verb 'Find' is specific and the resource is well defined.

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 indicates when to use the tool (to find paid work) and provides filter guidance (by capability, network). It also suggests preferring testnet for cold-start scenarios. However, it does not explicitly explain when not to use it versus other discovery tools, leaving some ambiguity.

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