jobs_phenom_job

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses what the tool returns (single job with description, category, apply URL) and implies a read operation via 'Get.' However, it does not address behavior for invalid or missing ids, rate limits, or any side effects, which is a mild gap for an unannotated tool.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states purpose and output; the second explains both parameters efficiently. Key information is front-loaded.

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 read tool with two straightforward parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers inputs and return content. A minor gap is that it does not mention error behavior or explicitly confirm that no other steps are needed, but overall an agent can call this tool correctly based on the description alone.

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 baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by clarifying that domain matches the board endpoint's domain and by giving a concrete example of id format (JR10002958), making parameter semantics clearer.

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 ('Get'), a specific resource ('a single Phenom People job'), and the returned content (HTML/text description, category, apply URL). The single-job focus clearly distinguishes it from the sibling jobs_phenom_board, which is referenced as the source of the id.

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 correct workflow by explaining that 'domain is the tenant's careers domain (as in the board endpoint)' and 'id is the jobId/reqId from a board listing.' This tells the agent where the input values come from, though it does not explicitly state 'use this only after fetching a board listing' or name the board tool as an alternative.

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