job_salary_data

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It lists operations and required parameters but does not mention data sources, accuracy, update frequency, rate limits, or what happens for unknown titles/locations. The description is factual but lacks contextual behavior disclosure.

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 reasonably concise and structured with an operations list. However, the per-operation descriptions ('Job Salary', 'Company Job Salary') are tautological and add no information, so there is minor redundancy that could be trimmed for clarity.

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 moderate complexity (two operations) and no output schema, so the description should explain return values and limitations. It covers operations and required parameters but omits any detail about the response format, units, currency, or fallback behavior. Given the lack of an output schema, this is a clear gap in 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?

The input schema's 'args' is a generic object, so the description is the only source for parameter meaning. It explicitly lists required parameters for each operation (job_salary: job_title, location; company_job_salary: company, job_title), which goes beyond the schema. However, it does not specify argument types or value formats, preventing a higher score.

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 that the tool provides estimated salary ranges for job titles/locations and company-specific salaries. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on salary data, but lacks a direct verb like 'get' or 'retrieve' in the initial sentence, making it slightly less explicit than a top-tier purpose statement.

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 explains how to invoke operations (set 'operation' and pass args) but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like jsearch or realtime_glassdoor_data could also provide salary information, and there is no mention of scenarios where this tool is preferred or dispreferred, so the agent receives no decision-making support.

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