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

Annotations already declare read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds behavioral details such as returning a matched subset and requiring no API key, complementing the annotations without contradicting them.

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 compact and front-loaded with the key action ('call this now'), then provides essential parameter context and a follow-up step. No fluff or redundant information.

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 covers the purpose, parameter usage, return behavior, and next steps. It is self-contained for an agent to decide when and how to call the tool, even without reading the full schema.

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?

All parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds extra semantic context like 'case-insensitive' for capability and 'prefer testnet' for network, enriching the parameter meaning 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 finds paid work on the A2AWire job board, mentions filtering by capability and network, and describes the return of open jobs plus a matched subset. It is distinct from sibling tools by focusing on job discovery.

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 direct guidance like 'No API key needed — call this now' and 'prefer testnet for cold-start', and even suggests a follow-up action with start_job. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the actionable directives are sufficient for usage.

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