search_jobs

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

The description makes it clear this is a search operation and is likely read-only, which is useful given that no annotations are provided. However, it does not disclose important behavioral aspects such as whether an active Naukri session is required, what the response shape looks like, or how limit/page_num affect results.

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 well-front-loaded sentence. Every word contributes essential information: the source, the tone, and primary/optional filters. There is no fluff or redundancy.

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 description gives enough to understand core purpose and the primary filters. But with no output schema and no annotations, the agent is left to infer the return format and pagination behavior, which is a noticeable gap for a tool with 5 parameters.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description must compensate. It adds meaningful meaning to keywords, location, and experience by framing them as job search filters. However, it does not add anything beyond the schema for 'limit' and 'page_num', leaving those as inferred-only.

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 states a clear action ('Search Naukri job listings') and names the key filters: keywords, location, and years of experience. It identifies the resource as Naukri job listings, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_companies, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from get_recommended_jobs.

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 implies this is the keyword-based search entry point for Naukri job listings, especially given the sibling search_companies tool. There is no explicit guidance about when not to use it, such as 'use get_recommended_jobs for recommendations' or 'use get_job_details once you have a job ID.'

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