search_jobs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns matching jobs with a task snippet showing match context, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, non-destructive, or mention any specific permissions or rate limits.

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 consists of two concise sentences. The first sentence states the primary purpose and output. The second provides usage context. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundancy or fluff.

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 search tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description provides the essential context: what it searches (task prompts), what it returns (matching jobs with snippets), and when to use it (finding jobs by specific tool/repo/type). It lacks mention of result ordering, pagination, or limits, but overall is sufficient for effective use.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The tool description does not add additional semantic information beyond the schema for the parameters. The schema already provides adequate descriptions for query, days, and status, so the description does not need to elaborate further.

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?

Description clearly states 'Find jobs by content of task prompt' with a specific verb (find) and resource (jobs by task prompt). It implies differentiation from list_jobs by introducing content-based search, and provides concrete usage examples like finding jobs involving a specific tool or repo.

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 clear context for when to use this tool: 'Useful for finding all jobs that involved a specific tool, repo, or task type.' This helps guide the agent toward appropriate use cases. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or refer to alternative tools among the siblings.

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