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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scope context by stating it returns only metadata/approved fields and excludes secrets, contacts, and original files, but it does not describe authorization mechanics, return shape, or pagination behavior.

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 brief and front-loads the action: 'Read authorised job title'. The second sentence adds a relevant data-scope boundary, though the phrase 'through the existing application' is somewhat vague and does not add much actionable detail.

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 is a simple read operation with annotations covering safety, but the schema has zero description coverage for four parameters and no output schema. The description does not compensate by explaining targetId, query, limit, or offset, so an agent lacks enough context to invoke it confidently.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any of the four parameters. It does not clarify that targetId is the job title identifier, nor does it explain the purpose of query, limit, or offset.

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: 'Read authorised job title'. It is understandable as a singular retrieval operation, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling list_job_titles or clarify that it retrieves one job title by targetId.

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?

No when-to-use guidance is provided. The description does not explain when to use get_job_title instead of list_job_titles, nor does it mention prerequisites or expected conditions for calling it.

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