datasets_jobs_nearby

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses meaningful behavior: only geocoded postings participate, coordinates are back-filled by a geo-enrich worker, and open roles are the default. It could add return format or pagination details, but it covers significant caveats and default behavior, going beyond a simple summary.

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 reasonably concise, with the core purpose stated in the first sentence. The provider enum list is lengthy but necessary and placed at the end. Minor redundancy exists ('Find postings near a coordinate' restated by the next sentence), but the overall structure is efficient.

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?

Given the tool has 7 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the essential usage: coordinate-based search, radius, ordering, geocoding caveat, and provider filter. It lacks explicit description of the return fields or pagination behavior, but for a proximity search tool the provided context is solid and mostly sufficient.

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?

Despite 100% schema description coverage, the description adds value by explaining the provider enum values explicitly and clarifying the default of 'open roles only' which relates to include_closed. It also gives semantic context for radius_km and lat/lon, enhancing the schema descriptions.

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 opens with 'Find postings near a coordinate,' which clearly states a specific verb and resource. It further scopes the tool to geocoded job postings within a radius, ordered by distance, distinguishing it from sibling tools like datasets_jobs_search that likely search by text or filters.

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 implies the tool is for location-based job searches ('within radius_km of a lat/lon') and gives context like 'nearest first' and 'open roles only by default.' However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs. alternatives such as datasets_jobs_search or when not to use it, leaving the choice mostly inferential.

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