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

The description adds 'Returns a list (use cursor when paginated),' which discloses the return type and pagination mechanism. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only behavior is covered. The description provides additional behavioral context beyond annotations, though it does not mention the array structure (covered by schema) or potential error cases.

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 two short, front-loaded sentences with no redundant fluff. The core purpose is stated first, followed by a concise pagination note. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a fetch-by-URL tool with a read-only annotation and a single parameter fully documented in schema, the description covers the essential points: what it does, that it returns a list, and pagination. It doesn't explicitly mention that it accepts multiple URLs, but the schema handles that. The description is adequate, though it could briefly note that the URL must contain '/jobs/view/' to prevent user error, but that's in the schema already.

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 provides full documentation for the 'url' parameter, including the requirement to include '/jobs/view/'. The description's 'by job URL' adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema, and is slightly misleading by using the singular 'URL' when the parameter is an array. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get LinkedIn job postings by job URL.' This specifies the verb (get), resource (LinkedIn job postings), and key distinguishing input (job URL). It is unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like linkedin_jobs_search_list, which search for jobs rather than retrieve by URL.

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?

The phrase 'by job URL' explicitly conditions usage on having a job URL, which implies that without one, a search tool is more appropriate. While it doesn't name alternatives or state 'when not to use,' the condition is clear enough for an agent to infer that this toolkit is for fetching specific postings when URLs are known.

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