get_latest_jobs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It explains that results are sorted by recency, top_k controls count, and department is an exact filter, but it is silent on return format, error behavior, and whether the company must already exist in the system.

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 front-loaded with a single purpose sentence, followed by a compact Args list. Every sentence contributes either behavioral meaning or parameter semantics; there is no filler.

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 tool has an output schema, so return-value documentation is not required, and all parameters are covered. However, it doesn't clarify how this relates to sibling company-management tools (e.g., whether add_company is a prerequisite), nor does it state what happens for invalid slugs or missing departments.

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 0%, so the parameter explanations in the Args block are essential. Each parameter gets a meaningful explanation beyond the bare schema: the slug format, the 'exact department name' filter, and the default top_k behavior.

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 opening sentence names the operation precisely: get the most recently posted jobs for a company, optionally filtered by department. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_job or list_jobs, but it never explicitly contrasts those alternatives.

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 clear context on what the tool does and how to use the optional filters ('Leave blank to include all departments'), but it doesn't say when to prefer this over list_jobs or get_job, nor mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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