get_job_trends

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or any other behavioral traits beyond the basic purpose.

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 sentence of six words, which is very concise but lacks detail. While there is no fluff, the brevity comes at the expense of completeness, especially regarding parameter semantics and usage guidance.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description fails to provide context about the nature of the trends (e.g., counts, percentages, time periods). With no annotations and minimal parameter context, the description is incomplete for a tool that likely returns aggregated data.

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 description adds minimal value by mapping the parameters to 'role' (kw) and 'location' (loc), which is helpful given 0% schema coverage. However, it does not specify format, allowed values, or default behavior for the optional parameter.

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 purpose: 'Get hiring trends by role/location.' It uses a specific verb-resource combination and distinguishes from siblings like search_jobs and get_job_details by focusing on aggregate trends rather than individual job postings.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context for use, such as comparing with search_jobs for individual listings or when to use other job-related sibling tools.

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