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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns company name/slug/logo plus the count of new jobs, and that it counts jobs within the specified look-back window. This provides useful behavioral context beyond the name, though it doesn't explicitly state it's read-only (implied by 'get') or mention any side effects.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, then differentiation, then return value details. Every sentence contributes meaningful information with no fluff or repetition.

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 only two optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description mentions the key output fields (company name/slug/logo and job count), the selection criterion (most AI/ML jobs), and the time window concept. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand what the tool does and what it returns.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds some context by explaining that 'days' controls the look-back window for job counts, but it doesn't add meaning for 'limit' beyond what the schema already specifies. Minimal additional semantic value over 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: to list companies posting the most AI/ML jobs in a given time window. It uses a specific verb+resource structure and explicitly contrasts with the sibling tool get_stats trending_tags_7d, distinguishing what this tool answers versus that one.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance by comparing to get_stats trending_tags_7d: 'while that answers what skills are trending, this answers who's hiring most aggressively'. This gives clear context for choosing this tool over the alternative.

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