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 nothing beyond that: no note that company/id must be sourced from a prior board listing, no disclosure of coverage limits or failure mode when a posting is expired. It is a bare label, not behavioral context.

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?

It is short, but shortness here is under-specification rather than economy: a three-word fragment with no verb, no object, and no front-loaded action. Nothing is wasted because nothing is said.

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 values need not be explained. But for a lookup tool keyed on two opaque required strings, the description supplies no sourcing guidance, no sibling routing, and no scope limits, leaving the agent with only the name to work from.

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% and the description says nothing about either required parameter. The agent gets no hint that 'company' is a Lever board slug and 'id' is a posting UUID rather than a title or URL, which is exactly the ambiguity this description should resolve.

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?

"Single Lever posting" is essentially a restatement of the tool name, not a description of an action. It carries one scrap of information: that this returns one posting versus the plural jobs_lever_postings. That single contrast saves it from a 1, but there is no verb and no statement of what is retrieved.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this instead of jobs_lever_postings or jobs_company_search, and no indication of where the required company/id values come from. The agent must infer the list-vs-detail relationship entirely from the tool names.

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