veroq_world_jobs

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

Description discloses returns (latest figures, historical comparison, metrics) and cost (1 credit). Since no annotations are provided, it carries the full burden; it is clear about the read-only nature implicitly. No mention of auth or rate limits, but adequate for a simple data retrieval tool.

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?

Very concise and well-structured with sections: main line, WHEN TO USE, RETURNS, COST, EXAMPLE. Every sentence adds value with no fluff.

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 0 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, returns, and cost. It mentions historical comparison and labor market metrics, though could elaborate on update frequency or specific indicators. Still fairly complete.

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?

Input schema has 0 parameters (100% coverage), so baseline is 4. Description adds meaning by specifying what data is returned, which is sufficient for a parameterless tool.

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?

Description clearly states the tool provides BLS employment data (nonfarm payrolls, unemployment rate, labor market indicators) for the US. It distinguishes itself from siblings by specifying the source and focus on US employment, which is different from other economic tools like veroq_economy.

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?

Explicit 'WHEN TO USE' section specifies US employment data from BLS and its use for market analysis and Fed policy expectations. It does not mention when not to use or provide alternatives, but the context is clear.

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