search_apple_jobs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that place names are auto-resolved to Apple location codes and that locale affects only output URLs, but it does not describe authentication, rate limits, return format, or result pagination 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 three tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded. Each sentence adds useful context about search scope or the location/locale behavior, with 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?

For a five-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description covers the main ambiguity around location versus locale and explains automatic location resolution. It does not describe the shape of returned job results or pagination beyond the limit parameter, but it is largely complete for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters. The description still adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that location drives country scope and that place names are automatically resolved, while reinforcing that locale only changes storefront links.

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 specific verb and resource: searching jobs.apple.com by title and location. Naming the Apple jobs domain clearly distinguishes this from sibling job-board search tools such as search_linkedin_jobs or search_indeed. It also clarifies the key location/locale distinction up front.

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?

Usage is implied by the platform-specific description: use this to search Apple job postings. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this instead of other job-search siblings or state 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.