linkedin_export_jobs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds the format-export behavior but no additional latency, pagination, or file-handling context beyond what the annotations provide.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by use cases and a pointer to a sibling tool. Every phrase earns its place with no redundancy.

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 9-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers use case, output formats, and filter semantics. It could be more explicit about whether exporting returns file content directly or creates a file, but the format parameter and annotations reduce ambiguity.

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 only 44%, but the description compensates by stating it accepts the same filters as linkedin_search_jobs, giving semantic context to keyword, location, datePosted, and other search filters. Format and source are already described in the schema, and the cross-reference effectively fills the gap for the undocumented filters.

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 states a clear action: run a job search and export results to JSON, CSV, or Markdown. It also distinguishes the tool by referencing the same filters as linkedin_search_jobs, making its job-specific purpose explicit.

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 cites concrete use cases: building a pipeline spreadsheet or feeding another tool. It implies a relationship with linkedin_search_jobs by referencing its filters, though it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool instead of searching or exporting search results.

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