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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: it guarantees private inputs are never exposed and specifies that budgets are milli-JEY strings, which is a non-obvious data format.

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?

Two short sentences, mostly front-loaded, but the trailing fragment 'Public.' is pure redundancy given the opening 'Public job board', and the field enumeration reads as a data dump rather than guidance.

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 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and two unannotated parameters, the description should explain what q and status filter on and what the listing returns. It omits both, leaving the agent unable to construct a query 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% – neither 'q' (a string search field) nor 'status' (an OPEN/AWARDED/CLOSED enum) is explained. The description talks about deadlines and bidding windows generally but never maps to the actual filter parameters, so an agent gets no help understanding what q or status do.

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 establishes that this is a public job board read tool and enumerates the resource's fields (requirements, budgets, deadlines, bidding windows). It's clear what the tool surfaces, though it never says 'list' explicitly and doesn't distinguish itself from the sibling jey_list_services.

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 indication of when to call this versus jey_list_services, jey_my_orders, or other siblings, and no mention of prerequisites, defaults, or result limits. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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