harvest_get_job

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

With no annotations, the description is the only source of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the input requirement but says nothing about output shape, error handling, or whether both parameters can be used. The verb 'Get' implies a read operation, but additional context would be helpful.

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 one concise sentence that leads with the action and immediately states the key constraint. No wasted words.

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 2-parameter getter, the description provides enough information to invoke the tool correctly. The lack of an output schema means the return type isn't detailed, but 'job details' is understandable; still, slightly more detail about the output or error cases would improve completeness.

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% with each parameter described, but the description adds the crucial relationship that at least one is required, which the schema does not convey. This goes beyond the structured field 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 clearly states 'Get LinkedIn job details' with a specific verb and resource, and the requirement 'requires at least one of jobId or url' adds scope. This distinguishes it from sibling search tools like harvest_search_jobs and getters for other resources.

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 a clear prerequisite condition ('requires at least one of jobId or url') that tells the agent when to use this tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the sibling tool names make the use case inferable.

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