List Jobs

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint and non-destructive annotations by disclosing the default sort order ('most-recently updated first') and the specific return fields (slug, company_slug, contact_slug, hiring_pipeline_id). This is useful practical information, though it does not mention pagination specifics, which are already covered in the schema and output schema.

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 concise and well-structured: the first sentence states the primary purpose and default ordering, the second covers return fields and usage alternatives. Every sentence contributes useful information without 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?

The description covers scope (all jobs in account), default ordering, return shape, and alternatives, which is comprehensive for a read-only listing tool with no required parameters and a full output schema. It provides enough context for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage for all four parameters with detailed descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add new parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides, as it focuses on the overall behavior and return shape.

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 tool lists all jobs in the account, with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from search_jobs by explicitly noting that filtered queries should use search_jobs, providing clear sibling differentiation.

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 provides explicit usage guidance: use search_jobs for filtered queries, and use hiring_pipeline_id with list_candidate_hiring_stages for job-specific stage lookup. This tells the agent exactly when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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