discover_jobs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose real side effects: it scrapes live sites, enriches with ATS detection, expands career pages, stores results locally, and opens the web app. It stops short of stating auth/login requirements or that it is slow/network-dependent beyond the career_discovery note in the schema.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose and the primary-tool routing statement. The final sentence listing the pipeline is a bit dense but each clause conveys a distinct behavior, so little is wasted.

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?

No output schema and no annotations, so the description must convey behavior, which it does for the scraping/enrichment/store/open pipeline. What is missing for a tool that hits external job sites is any note on runtime, failure modes, or prerequisites, though the schema's career_discovery note partially covers timeouts.

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 100% and the schema itself is unusually rich (page limit, source defaults, timeout rationale for career_discovery, plus an imperative to ask about page count). The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Find jobs ... by scraping live listings from job sites') and names example sources (LinkedIn, SEEK, Jora). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like get_jobs (retrieval of stored jobs) and schedule_jobs (scheduling recurring runs).

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?

Explicitly says 'This is the primary tool for job searching — always use this when the user wants to find, search, or look for jobs,' giving clear usage context. It does not, however, name or exclude the nearby alternatives (schedule_jobs for recurring discovery, get_jobs for already-stored results), which would complete the routing picture.

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