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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, and the description's 'Find' is consistent with those. However, the description adds no extra behavioral context beyond what the annotations state, such as locale-dependent response text or limit 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 a single front-loaded sentence: verb, resource, and filter dimensions with no filler or repeated information. It is appropriately economical for the tool's purpose.

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?

The schema covers some parameters, and the annotations cover the read-only safety profile, but the description is not fully self-sufficient: it omits the limit parameter, leaves the lang/language distinction ambiguous, and does not describe the return value shape in the absence of an output schema. It is adequate but has clear gaps.

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 description helps give meaning to 'city', which lacks a schema description, and mentions contract type)Skip and language. However, it does not mention the limit parameter, and its use of 'language' is ambiguous because the schema defines both lang (output locale) and language (listing language), which the description does not clarify.

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 a specific verb ('Find'), a concrete resource ('job listings on Pionra'), and the filter dimensions (city, language, contract type). It stands apart from sibling tools like find_housing, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the broader search_pionra tool.

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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_pionra, no when-not-to-use instructions, and no mention of prerequisites or fallback behavior. The use case is only implied by the verb and noun.

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