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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: sorting order, the default 14-day range, a page-size cap of 100, and the underlying endpoint. It omits auth or rate-limit details, but coverage is solid for a read-only list operation.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose and sorting, followed by filters/paging/default behavior and then an endpoint reference. Mostly efficient, though the endpoint mention is optional detail that could be trimmed without losing agent-relevant meaning.

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?

With no output schema, the description still conveys core list semantics: sorting, filtering, paging, and the default date window. It does not describe the response shape, but for a read-only list tool with complete parameter documentation, it is largely complete.

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 100%, so all five parameters are fully documented in the input schema. The description restates filters and paging but adds no syntax or format details beyond what the schema already provides, warranting the baseline score.

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 ('List') and resource ('jobs'), and adds the sort order (JobDateTime descending). It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_job (single job) or list_leads (different resource), so sibling distinction is left implicit.

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?

Describes filtering options (start date, open-only, status) and paging with offset/records, and notes the default 14-day window when start_date is omitted. It provides clear invocation context but does not say when to prefer or avoid this tool versus alternatives like get_job or list_leads.

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