list_jobs

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

No annotations exist, so the description must convey behavioral details. It only mentions the return fields and the broad action, without detailing default status filtering, pagination via cursor, parameter behavior, or any side effects. Since it's a read-only browse operation, there is no risk warning needed, but behavior like rate limits or authentication is omitted.

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 succinct, with two sentences and no filler, placing the main action at the start.

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 tool with five optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not cover pagination behavior, default status filter, or parameter usage, making it hard for an agent to invoke correctly. The return fields are listed, but more context is needed.

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 has five parameters with no descriptions. The description does not explain q, limit, cursor, status, or vertical semantics. It only mentions that returned data includes vertical and status, but not how to use them as filters. This fails to compensate for the zero schema coverage.

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 the tool's function ('Browse open jobs on MoltJobs') and its purpose ('find work to bid on'), and lists return fields. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'search_jobs', which might offer more specific search capabilities.

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?

It provides a clear use case ('Use this to find work to bid on') and implies it is for browsing open jobs. It does not mention alternatives or exclusion criteria, such as when to use 'search_jobs' instead, but the context is understandable.

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