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

Annotations already mark this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavioral context on top: results are 'sanitized public details', link back to PhysicalAI.jobs, and 'never exposes a hidden employer ATS URL' – a privacy guarantee not inferable from the 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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first states the operation, and the second covers usage context and key behavioral guardrails. Information is front-loaded and each sentence contributes a distinct fact.

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 output schema covers return values, and the description supplies the remaining operational context: when to call it, what kind of data to expect, and the linking/privacy behavior. For a one-parameter read-only detail fetcher, nothing essential is missing.

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 fully documents the sole `id` parameter with type constraints and the description 'Stable public job ID returned by PhysicalAI.jobs.' The description's phrase 'for one ... listing' aligns with the parameter but adds no new syntax or format details, so the baseline 3 applies given 100% schema coverage.

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?

Description uses a clear verb-object structure: 'Retrieve additional sanitized public details for one PhysicalAI.jobs listing.' The singular 'one' and 'details' distinguish it from the sibling search tools, and the title reinforces the same purpose. No ambiguity about what resource the tool acts on.

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?

States the intended workflow: 'Use this after search_jobs or latest_jobs when the user wants more information.' That gives a clear trigger condition and places it in a sequence with siblings. It does not explicitly spell out when not to use it or name an alternative tool, so it falls short of a full when/when-not statement.

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