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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds two behavioral facts beyond annotations: pagination and that results are illustrative (not live offers). Pagination details (page size, offsets) are left to the schema.

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 clauses front-loading purpose and filters, then pagination/disclaimer. No filler.

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?

A read-only, 6-param search tool with no output schema. The description covers purpose, filter dimensions, pagination, and result nature. It could be more complete by noting that all results are non-live and pagination bounds, but overall adequate.

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%, so the description must carry the load. It names the filter dimensions (keywords, company, work arrangement, minimum USD base salary) and clarifies currency/units for minSalary, which the bare schema does not. It does not clarify limit/offset semantics, but the names are conventional.

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 (roles) with inline scope of filters. The sibling get_job/get_company are single-entity lookups, so the plural search framing is distinguishable without opening schemas.

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?

Usage is implied by the filter list, but no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives are named. An agent could reasonably wonder whether check_job_posting or get_job is the better sibling for a specific role. No exclusions stated.

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