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

With no annotations, the description does carry some weight: 'your active' signals identity-scoped results and filtering out inactive alerts, and '(seeker key)' hints at the auth requirement. It says nothing about ordering, pagination, or result shape, so the safety and behavior profile is only partially disclosed.

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?

A single short sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded, which is appropriate for a trivial read. The '(seeker key)' parenthetical is slightly cryptic terminology that a reader may not decode without prior context.

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 simple and parameterless, but with no output schema the description should say what a job alert record contains or at least whether the list is bounded. That return-value gap is the main missing piece for an otherwise low-complexity tool.

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?

The schema takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain; the baseline of 4 applies. The parenthetical '(seeker key)' arguably touches the implicit identity input, but the tool is genuinely parameterless.

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?

It pairs a specific verb ('List') with a specific resource ('your active job alerts'), and 'active' adds a real scope qualifier. It does not differentiate itself from siblings like create_job_alert or delete_job_alert, but the resource is 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?

There is no statement of when to call this versus create_job_alert, delete_job_alert, or any other listing tool. The agent must infer from the name alone that this is a read of existing alerts, with no exclusions or prerequisites given.

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