Get Job Details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description doesn't need to repeat safety. It adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., rate limits, auth requirements, or what 'details' includes). The description is consistent with annotations, so no contradiction, but it adds little beyond the structured data.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool with one parameter, though it could add a bit more context without becoming verbose.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema present, annotations provided), the description is adequate but minimal. It doesn't explain what 'job details' includes or any edge cases, but the output schema likely covers return values. It is complete enough for a straightforward retrieval tool.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single parameter job_id, which includes an example. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate. No extra context about the parameter's format or constraints is provided.

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 retrieves job details for a specific LinkedIn job posting, using a specific verb ('get') and resource ('job details'). It distinguishes from siblings like search_jobs and get_saved_jobs by focusing on a single job ID, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 implies usage when a specific job ID is known, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_jobs or get_saved_jobs. No exclusions or alternative tool names are provided, so guidance is minimal but not misleading.

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