Fetch one Google Careers job posting by the numeric ID returned by google_jobs_search. Use google_jobs_search to discover openings before retrieving a specific posting.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Numeric Google job id |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | The tool result payload (shape varies per tool; see each tool's docs resource). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / id / descriptionAdded value: +"Numeric Google job id"Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety and external-access profile. The description adds only the input dependency (ID from search) and does not disclose other behavior like ID stability, expiry, or rate limits; with annotations present, a 3 is appropriate.
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, front-loaded with the action and resource, then the prerequisite. 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?
For a simple one-parameter read-only lookup with full schema coverage, an output schema, and annotations covering safety/open-world access, the description supplies everything needed: what it returns, the required input provenance, and the prerequisite search step.
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 100% and the schema already says 'Numeric Google job id'. The description adds useful provenance by specifying the ID is returned by google_jobs_search, which helps the agent know where to obtain it.
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 (Fetch) and resource (one Google Careers job posting), and anchors the ID to google_jobs_search. This distinguishes it from google_jobs_search and other job lookup siblings.
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?
Explicitly directs the agent to use google_jobs_search first to discover openings, naming the alternative and the prerequisite condition. An agent knows this tool is for retrieval after discovery, not for search.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.