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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, openWorld), so the description's added value is the pagination size (25 per page) and cost ($0.006 per request), which are genuinely useful operational facts not in the structured data.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and scope, then filters, then operational facts. The return-field enumeration is slightly long but justified because there is no output schema to carry it.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by listing returned fields, and it adds pagination and billing details, leaving nothing an agent needs to call it correctly unstated.

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 schema already documents all seven parameters including enums and formats. The description's filter summary (recency, job type, company, location) merely maps to existing params without adding syntax or constraints beyond 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Search LinkedIn job listings by keyword") and clearly scopes to listings rather than a single posting, distinguishing it from siblings like linkedin_job_details and search_linkedin_companies.

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?

Gives a concrete use case ("useful as a hiring or expansion signal") and enumerates the available filter dimensions, but does not name alternative tools or state when this tool should not be used over, e.g., search_linkedin or linkedin_job_details.

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