upwork_job

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that data is 'Public data sourced from Upwork's own server-rendered job pages via a real browser-rendering backend,' informing the agent about the data source and potential behavior (e.g., real browser rendering, scraping). It also notes the output is 'normalized,' which adds useful context beyond the schema.

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 concise and front-loaded with the verb. It efficiently lists the returned fields in a single sentence, avoiding redundancy. The closing sentence about public data and browser backend adds value without bloat. No filler words or unnecessary details.

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's simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema), the description is sufficiently complete. It lists the returned data fields extensively and explains the data source. It does not detail the output structure, but that is implicitly a JSON object. For a detail-fetch tool, this covers the essential context for selection and 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?

The schema already provides a clear description for the sole parameter 'id' ('Upwork job id, e.g. from a search result's id field'), achieving 100% schema coverage. The tool description does not add any additional parameter-specific semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get Upwork job posting detail,' a specific verb+resource construction that clearly states the tool's function. It enumerates the returned fields, distinguishing it from sibling tools like upwork_search (which likely returns job lists) and upwork_freelancer (which targets freelancer profiles).

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternatives are named. The description only states the action and data source. The parameter schema hints that the id comes from search results, but the tool description itself does not clarify that this is for supplementing search results or how it differs from upwork_search. Usage is implied but not articulated.

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