Search Jobs

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only names three high-level transformations. It leaves 'permitted' undefined and says nothing about ranking criteria, filtering behavior, mutation, or how the query parameter is used.

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 a single efficient sentence that front-loads the main action verbs and avoids repetition. The terseness hurts completeness rather than conciseness, so this dimension remains relatively strong.

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 four-parameter tool with no annotations and zero schema descriptions, this description is too thin. The output schema may cover return shape, but an agent still lacks understanding of query semantics, the meaning of 'permitted', and how ranking or deduplication behaves.

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 0%, so the description needed to compensate for the four parameters, but it does not. The vague 'supplied job data' may allude to manual_jobs and email_alerts, but query and limit receive no explanatory treatment at all.

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 provides specific verbs ('normalize, rank, and deduplicate') and identifies the resource ('permitted supplied job data'), so an agent can tell this tool processes provided job data rather than performing a generic search. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like score_job, but the core action is clear enough.

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 phrase 'supplied job data' weakly implies this tool is for user-provided job payloads rather than a broad external search, giving some context. However, it offers no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives among the sibling tools.

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