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. It discloses that it searches JobKorea and Saramin and returns specific fields, and states any company name is searchable. But it doesn't discuss pagination, platform selection behavior, or potential limitations/side effects, which is a gap for a tool with no annotations.

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 overly verbose with redundant bilingual repetition, repeating the same information in English and Korean. It could be condensed to a single sentence, and the structure is not front-loaded with the most essential information.

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 description covers purpose, usage, and return fields, and the schema covers parameters. However, it lacks details about pagination behavior, the platform parameter's effect, and the exact response format (e.g., how results are structured), which is important given no output schema.

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%, so each parameter is already described. The description adds little beyond the schema, only reiterating that any company name can be searched, which is implied by the schema's description.

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 searches Korean job postings by company name across JobKorea and Saramin, and lists the returned fields. It distinguishes from the sibling (search_jobs_bulk) by focusing on single-company search, though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling.

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 explicitly tells the agent to use this tool for questions related to job search, hiring, career, and recruitment. However, it doesn't specify when not to use it or mention alternative tools, so the guidance is clear but lacks exclusions.

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