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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context: results use the shared Job shape, pagination is limit/offset, and pages are capped at 10 jobs.

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 tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded, followed by filtering/pagination behavior and the routing hint. 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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is rightly omitted while still pointing at the shared Job shape. Required params, the page cap, and the handoff to the detail tool are all covered; only the tenant/domain format is left implicit.

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 carries the burden, and it addresses every parameter functionally: tenant/domain are required, query/location are optional filters, limit/offset drive pagination. It stops short of specifying the expected format for tenant or domain.

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 (current openings on a public Eightfold AI board) with the required inputs named. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling jobs_eightfold_job, which handles the full detail view.

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?

Gives clear context for when to use it and names the alternative (jobs_eightfold_job) for full descriptions. It does not, however, explain when to choose the Eightfold board over the many other board providers (ashby, gem, greenhouse, etc.).

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