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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description adds value by specifying the includeClosed filtering behavior and the absence of application side effects. The caution about Foundaree being new and potentially having few results is helpful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 well-structured and front-loaded: purpose first, then usage, behavior, return format, and side-effect clarification. Every sentence adds unique value, with no filler. It is longer than average but justified given the tool's complexity and the need to convey multiple behaviors.

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?

Complete for a search tool: covers what it searches, how to invoke it, what results look like (items structure and total), the includeClosed option, and the realistic data scarcity. No output schema exists, so describing the return JSON is necessary and done well. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 the schema documents all parameters. The description adds meaning by explaining what query matches (title, description, city, skills) and clarifies includeClosed behavior, which goes beyond the schema's basic property descriptions. This extra context justifies a score above the baseline 3.

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 (search) and resource (public openings on Foundaree) and enumerates the role types it covers. It clearly distinguishes from sibling search tools (search_people, search_organizations) by focusing on openings, so an agent can pick it without ambiguity.

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?

Provides explicit triggers ('when the user is looking for work or a role', 'asks what a company is hiring for') with concrete examples. It also states what it does not do (does not apply for anyone) and warns about sparse data, giving clear guidance on when to use and what to expect.

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