hires_create_job

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only mentions the action and scope. It fails to disclose important side effects such as automatic creation of a default form or workflow when form_id or workflow_id are omitted, or whether the job is published immediately based on status. This is a significant gap for a create tool with 28 parameters.

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 three concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. It avoids redundancy and fluff, with each sentence contributing either purpose, usage context, or essential required-field information. This is appropriately sized for a 28-parameter tool.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (28 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, side effects like default form/workflow creation, or how status affects publishing. The schema describes parameters but cannot compensate for missing high-level behavioral and output context.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all 28 parameters are documented. The description adds only high-level grouping ('taxonomy, location, salary, and workflow configuration') and repeats required fields, which is already in the schema. It does not add meaningful detail beyond the schema, warranting the baseline score of 3.

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's function: 'Create a job' with taxonomy, location, salary, and workflow configuration. It also positions it as the 'Primary endpoint for programmatic job publishing,' distinguishing it from siblings like hires_update_job, hires_delete_job, and hires_set_job_status.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: 'Primary endpoint for programmatic job publishing.' It implies this is the go-to creation tool for jobs, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, such as 'use hires_update_job to modify an existing job.'

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