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 of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Search' and does not mention pagination, filter interactions, or any operational behavior beyond what the name itself already implies.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is concise. However, the brevity crosses into under-specification because it omits nearly all operational detail needed to use the tool effectively.

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?

The tool has 11 parameters, no annotations, and zero parameter descriptions, yet the description only identifies the domain. The output schema covers return values, but usage criteria, parameter semantics, and sibling differentiation are all unaddressed, making the tool difficult to invoke correctly.

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 0%, and the description names none of the 11 parameters such as query, remote, limit, or page. The agent receives no semantic help beyond parameter titles and defaults, which is insufficient for such a parameter-heavy tool.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and a clear resource ('YC startup jobs on WorkAtAStartup'), so an agent knows what the tool does. It does not explicitly contrast it with filter_jobs_by_skills, whose purpose could overlap, so it does not fully achieve sibling differentiation.

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 no guidance about when to use this tool versus siblings like filter_jobs_by_skills or get_job_details. It states neither preconditions, exclusions, nor conditions that would help route an agent to the correct tool.

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