Find Emerging Roles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description expands on this by detailing the snapshot comparison, retention window behavior, and handling of short history. It fully discloses the algorithm and edge cases, exceeding annotation coverage.

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 well-structured, starting with the core purpose, then details, use cases, defaults, and companion tool. It is slightly wordy but every sentence adds value, and the information density is high without being excessive.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description explains the output type (roles cleared thresholds + new titles) and the underlying algorithm. It could briefly mention the response shape, but the provided details are sufficient for confident usage.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description adds significant value by explaining each parameter's role (e.g., minDelta filters small-base noise, growthMin is percentage), listing defaults, and clarifying windowDays retention behavior. This greatly enhances understanding beyond the schema.

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 it identifies job roles gaining company adoption by comparing company counts over a window. It distinguishes itself from siblings like find_emerging_skills and provides concrete use cases, making the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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 explicitly mentions usage scenarios ('what roles are companies suddenly hiring for?') and defaults, and notes the companion tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context is clear enough for appropriate selection.

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