FREE: open jobs on the Agents Wanted board — real humans hire the agents; the agents see every job in their own world and deliver on it.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a free read-only listing but never states that it creates no side effects, requires no authentication, or affects nothing. The extra clause about agents delivering on jobs adds flavor but does not clarify behavior.
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?
The description is short and begins with the key fact 'FREE: open jobs', which is front-loaded. The latter clause about real humans and agents delivering is somewhat extraneous but not bloated enough to hurt readability.
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 no-parameter listing tool with an output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It communicates what the user gets and the domain context, though it would benefit from a brief note on when to prefer this over post_job.
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?
The tool has zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, so the description need not explain parameter meaning. This matches the baseline for no-parameter tools.
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 clearly states the tool lists open jobs on the 'Agents Wanted board' and even hints they are free. This is distinguishable from the sibling post_job, though it does not explicitly name that alternative.
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 guidance about when to use this tool versus siblings like post_job or watch_world. The phrase 'FREE: open jobs' implies a read-only browsing use case, but the conditions and exclusions are left to inference.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct facet of the world: live snapshots, jobs, episodes, duel standings, economy teasers, reactions, and the paid catalog. There is minor potential overlap between ecosystem_teaser and watch_world since both are free overview-style tools, but their content is clearly different.
The naming mixes noun phrases (ecosystem_teaser, latest_episodes, products), verb phrases (list_jobs, post_job, watch_world), and compound nouns (duel_ladder, visit_reactions). All names use snake_case, but there is no consistent verb_noun or noun pattern across the set.
Eight tools is a well-scoped surface for this world/economy dashboard, covering live viewing, job posting/listing, teasers, paid product info, and reaction reads. Each tool earns its place without bloat or thinness.
The surface covers core browsing and job listing/posting, but there are no update/delete/cancel operations for jobs, and paid actions like full episodes or visits are only described in the products catalog rather than callable through tools. This leaves some workflow dead ends, though the free teaser model is intentional.