list_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 states that the tool returns a list of positions and supports substring filtering, which is transparent about its core behavior. However, it does not explicitly mention that it is read-only or describe the output format, making it only minimally adequate.

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 three concise sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and followed by supporting details. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or redundant content.

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 simple list tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and use case. It could mention what the returned items look like (e.g., titles only), but the explicit link to suggest_profile_by_job provides sufficient context for an agent.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions and examples for both limit and filter parameters, so the schema already handles parameter semantics. The description adds no extra parameter information, warranting the baseline score of 3.

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 action: 'Возвращает список должностей из базы данных сотрудников' (Returns a list of positions from the employee database), including a count of 417 positions. It also distinguishes its purpose by noting it helps find the exact job title before calling suggest_profile_by_job, which is a sibling tool.

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 a specific use case: 'Помогает найти точное название должности перед вызовом suggest_profile_by_job' (Helps find the exact job title before calling suggest_profile_by_job), and mentions substring filtering as a feature. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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