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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description's job is to add context — and it does, by enumerating the returned fields and qualifying that only a 'live' job is returned. It stops short of saying what happens when a job is expired or the slug is invalid, which is the main remaining gap.

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 sentence listing the payload contents with no filler. It is slightly informal ('what it involves', 'what's needed') where precise field names would be stronger, but nothing is wasteful.

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 one-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and clear annotations, this is close to sufficient: the agent knows what it gets back and that it is a safe read. Only the missing linkage to search_jobs and the not-found/expired behavior keep it from being complete.

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 parameter already documents 'The job's link or slug from search_jobs', including length bounds. The description adds nothing about the identifier format, so the baseline 3 is correct — the schema does all the work here.

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 makes clear this retrieves the full detail record for a single job, enumerating what that record contains (pay, hours, requirements, business, apply link). The 'one live job' phrasing implicitly separates it from the plural search_jobs sibling, though it never names the sibling explicitly.

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 statement of when to call this versus search_jobs, nor any prerequisite such as 'call search_jobs first to obtain the job link or slug'. The workflow hint exists only in the schema's parameter text, not in the description, so the agent must infer the lookup sequence.

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