freelance_search_jobs

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

Since no annotations exist, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the public marketplace scope, the open status, and the required permission READ_DIRECTORY. It does not describe the response shape or pagination behavior, but those are reasonably inferable for a search tool and covered partially by schema fields.

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 sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, the permission follows naturally, and the sibling distinction closes it. Every sentence 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?

Despite having no annotations and no output schema, the description covers scope, permission, and routing to the correct sibling tool. The main omissions are response format and explicit pagination expectations, but those are minor for a read-oriented search tool and the schema supplies limit and offset semantics.

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 description itself adds no filter-specific guidance, and the top-level parameter has no prose description, making schema coverage 0%. However, the nested filter object's properties are individually well-described in the schema, which offsets most of the gap. The description could have summarized key filters but is not fatally deficient.

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 uses a specific verb and object: 'Search open, publicly visible job postings across the whole marketplace.' It also identifies the exact scope ('FIND WORK side') and distinguishes itself from freelance_list_org_jobs, so there is no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 states when to use the tool: to find bid-able, publicly visible marketplace work. It also gives an explicit exclusion and alternative: 'for your own organization's requisitions ... use freelance_list_org_jobs instead.' It additionally provides the permission prerequisite READ_DIRECTORY.

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