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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it lists categories and can be used for filtering, which is consistent. No contradictions, but the description does not reveal any additional behavioral traits not covered by 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 a single, well-structured sentence that conveys the purpose and usage efficiently. No redundant words or unnecessary details.

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 (one optional parameter, no required fields) and has an output schema. The description provides enough context for an agent to understand its use and place among sibling tools. It does not explicitly describe the return structure, but this is acceptable given the output schema exists.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for the single 'country' parameter. The description does not add new information about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, but it does mention example categories, which indirectly relates to the output. Baseline score 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 lists job categories for a country, with specific examples (IT, Sales, etc.), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'jobs.adzuna.search' and 'jobs.adzuna.salary' by noting that categories are used to filter search results.

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 description provides clear context (list categories for a country) and explicitly states how to use the output (filter 'adzuna.search' results). However, it does not mention when not to use it or compare to alternatives beyond the single sibling reference.

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