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

The description adds substantial context beyond annotations: it adds a search and changes nothing else, can be removed with the delete sibling, sends nothing to employers, and spends nothing. These details clarify the non-destructive, open-world=false behavior declared in annotations.

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 front-loaded with the action and optional parameters, then efficiently covers side effects, exclusions, and next steps. Every sentence contributes useful routing or behavioral 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?

With an output schema, annotations, and fully documented parameters, the description provides everything needed to select and invoke the tool correctly. It also routes to alternatives and follow-up tools.

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%, so the schema already documents both name and alerts_enabled. The description restates their meaning, including the fallback naming behavior and email effect, but adds no meaningful semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: saving the user's current job preferences as a new named saved search. It also distinguishes the tool from getmattered_update_job_preferences and identifies getmattered_delete_saved_search as the removal path.

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?

It explicitly says to use getmattered_update_job_preferences to change what the user is matched with, and says not to use this tool for that purpose. It also identifies the next tool to call, getmattered_list_saved_searches.

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