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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently reveals that the list is compact and omits the URL, that 'remote' is a heuristic and may be inaccurate, that sorting prioritizes title matches, that paging is only via next_cursor with a limited page count, and the zero-result behavior. This is exemplary transparency.

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 a single well-structured paragraph that front-loads the core purpose and then delivers necessary caveats and usage details. Every sentence adds value—no filler. It balances completeness with conciseness.

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?

For a tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is remarkably complete. It covers the returned fields, the missing URL and how to get it, filtering options, sorting, paging constraints, and edge cases. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and decide when to escalate to fetch_job.

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 parameters already have descriptions. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: it warns about the remote heuristic, explains max_age_days with an example, and clarifies cursor usage (next_cursor from a previous response). While not every parameter is individually elaborated, the added context enriches the schema without redundancy.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Sucht Stellenanzeigen auf alleskralle.com' (searches job postings) and specifies the region (DE/AT/CH). It explicitly differentiates from the sibling fetch_job by noting what this tool does NOT return (the detail URL), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus fetch_job: 'für vollständige Details und den klickbaren Link rufe fetch_job mit der id auf.' It also explains the remote heuristic, sorting order, max_age_days usage, and paging limitations, giving clear operational context.

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