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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: 'Credential-free public ATS JSON', telling the agent no authentication is needed and the source is public. An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained.

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 short sentences, each carrying distinct information (what/scope, paging, identifier origin, auth, alternative). Front-loaded with the core action and no wasted words.

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 read-only paged list tool with full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, nothing an agent needs is missing: purpose, paging, identifier source, auth-free nature, and sibling routing are all present.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it explains that limit/offset drive paging and that 'company' is the identifier taken from the careers URL, clarifying how to obtain the value rather than just restating the type.

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 and resource ('Lists a company's public SmartRecruiters postings') with pagination mechanism named, and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling jobs_smartrecruiters_posting. An agent can tell the list-vs-single split without opening either schema.

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?

Names the alternative ('Use jobs_smartrecruiters_posting to get a single SmartRecruiters posting') and the condition that selects it. No explicit when-not guidance beyond that single sibling, but the routing is clear.

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