search_jobs

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. Discloses the API key dependency for location, but omits other behaviors such as pagination, empty result handling, default sources, or whether the tool returns jobs from all configured sources by default. Insufficient for a full behavioral understanding.

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?

Concise with four sentences, no fluff. Front-loads the main action and uses bullet-like structure for clarity. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers the main functionality and key parameters (query, location/radius, sources). Missing explanation for 'remote' parameter, which is not obviously inferred. Output schema exists so return values are documented elsewhere. Overall adequate for a search tool with multiple parameters.

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?

Adds meaning beyond the schema (0% description coverage) by explaining location/radius_km combo and sources parameter. However, 'remote' parameter is not explained (e.g., boolean for remote-only or include remote?), and max_results default is mentioned but not elaborated. Adds moderate value.

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?

Clearly states 'Search job listings across configured sources' with a specific verb and resource. Differentiates from sibling tools like search_jobs_in_region and geocode_location by focusing on general search with optional location filtering.

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?

Provides clear guidance: use location+radius_km for geospatial search (requires API key), omit for plain keyword search. Also mentions optional sources restriction. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use versus alternatives like search_jobs_in_region, but context is adequate.

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