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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output format (markdown) and content, but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what happens if the job_id does not exist, or any authentication requirements. It does not contradict any annotations since none are provided, but it lacks depth on error handling or side effects.

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 sentence that immediately states the tool's output ('Full job posting as markdown') and lists the key fields. It is front-loaded, concise, and every word earns its place without any 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?

For a simple get-by-id tool, the description covers the return content adequately, and since an output schema exists, return value structure is not required. However, it lacks usage context, parameter clarification, and any mention of behavior when the job is not found. It is minimally sufficient but leaves room for ambiguity.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. However, it never mentions the job_id parameter, its format, or how to obtain it. The agent must infer from the tool name and parameter name that an integer ID is needed, but no additional guidance is given.

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: retrieving a full job posting as markdown, and lists the specific fields included (title, company, location, salary, description, source link). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_company or search_jobs by focusing on a single job's complete details.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_jobs, which would be used to find jobs before retrieving details. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as having a valid job_id obtained from a search, or when to choose this over other get_* tools.

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