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 and the description does not contradict it. The description adds only the implicit 'single item, not a list' behavior; it says nothing about id provenance, not-found behavior, or data freshness, but with annotations carrying the safety burden this is an acceptable minimum.

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?

A single front-loaded clause with no filler or redundancy; every word contributes to identifying the tool's action and its key.

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 single-record lookup with an output schema, the description needn't explain return values, and annotations cover safety. The remaining gap is that it never says where the job id comes from (the list/search siblings), but otherwise an agent has everything needed to invoke it.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. Saying 'by job id' does give the lone 'id' parameter its semantic role (a Meta Careers job identifier), which the bare schema string does not. It still omits format/source details, so it only partially compensates.

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 names the specific resource (a Meta Careers job posting) and the key ('by job id'), and the word 'Single' implicitly separates it from the list/search siblings. However, it uses a noun phrase rather than a verb and never names meta_jobs_list or meta_jobs_search, so an agent must infer the distinction rather than being told it.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives (e.g., use meta_jobs_search to find an id first), and no stated prerequisites. Usage can only be inferred from the phrase 'by job id'.

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