suggest_professional_roles

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It conveys that the tool returns professional roles with IDs, which is useful, but it does not describe response shape, text length constraints, or other runtime behavior. This is enough for a basic understanding but not rich disclosure.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The core behavior is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the usage guidance is delivered concisely in the second. Every clause earns its place.

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 simple two-parameter autocomplete tool with full schema coverage, the description plus schema gives an agent enough to call it correctly. It states the endpoint, the purpose, and the use cases. It could add a bit more about expected output, but the ID mention partially covers that.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds little beyond the schema: it does not elaborate on 'text' or 'raw' parameters, though it does reinforce that the result is ID-based. The schema itself documents both parameters sufficiently.

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 a specific action ('Autocomplete professional roles with IDs') and names the endpoint (/suggests/professional_roles). It is not a tautology and conveys the tool's resource and purpose, though it does not explicitly differentiate from nearby siblings like get_professional_roles.

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 explicit usage contexts: 'Use for vacancy/resume search filters and salary stats.' This tells an agent when the tool is relevant, though it does not state when to prefer an alternative or when not to use it.

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