search_job_locations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Suggest Job Locations' without explaining whether the tool returns a list, how the query is matched, case sensitivity, sorting, pagination, or any other behavioral traits. This is insufficient for an agent to know what to expect.

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 very short ('Suggest Job Locations'), which is concise, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It lacks the necessary details to be useful and does not earn its place as an adequate tool description.

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 one-parameter tool, the description is still incomplete. It does not explain the format or nature of suggestions, how to use the query parameter, or how this tool relates to sibling tools like search_jobs. With no annotations or output schema, the description needs to provide more context than it does.

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?

The schema covers the 'query' parameter with an example value 'CA', and the tool description does not add any extra meaning. Since schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description does not enhance the schema's parameter information.

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 'Suggest Job Locations' uses a verb ('Suggest') and a resource ('Job Locations'), but it is vague about what 'suggest' means and how it differs from sibling tools such as search_jobs or get_available_trends_locations. The tool name 'search_job_locations' is more specific than the description, indicating a lack of clear scope.

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 no guidance about when to use this tool or how it relates to alternatives. There is no mention of autocomplete use cases, integration with search_jobs, or exclusion criteria for other location-related tools.

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