List XML Jobboards

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds useful return-structure context (rows with specific field names), but does not disclose additional behaviors beyond that. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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, focused sentence that states the purpose and the return structure without unnecessary detail. Every word earns its place.

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?

With no parameters, read-only annotations, and an output schema available, the description is fully sufficient. It specifies what the tool returns and the fields included, making it complete for a simple list operation.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description carries no parameter burden. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description adequately explains what the tool returns.

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 uses a specific verb ('Lists') and identifies the exact resource ('Recruit CRM XML job boards for jobs'). It also differentiates from sibling tools by focusing specifically on XML job boards and clarifies the return payload (default_xml_feeds and custom_xml_feeds with id and label).

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 usage context is implied: use this tool when needing the list of XML job boards/feeds. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention any alternative tools, even though no siblings directly overlap with this functionality.

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