linkedin_job_overview

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains endpoint behavior (shares with search API, job_id triggers detail mode), credits cost, and honestly acknowledges that no example response is published with expected fields but field names not confirmed.

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?

Description is concise (two sentences plus notes) and well-structured: purpose, credits, endpoint hints, parameter source, return expectations. No wasted words, though slightly dense.

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 simple tool (one parameter, no output schema or annotations), description covers purpose, parameter acquisition, endpoint behavior, credits, and expected return fields (with caveat). Lacks error handling details but adequate for scope.

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% with one parameter described. Description adds meaning beyond schema by explaining how to obtain job_id (from search or URL) and its role in triggering detail mode, providing valuable context.

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 action ('Retrieve detailed information') and resource ('specific LinkedIn job posting') with specific details (full description, requirements, company details). It distinguishes from sibling 'linkedin_jobs_search' by noting job_id is typically from a prior search.

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?

Description explains when to use (when job ID is available) and where to obtain job_id (from search or URL). It mentions credits cost and endpoint sharing, but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives beyond the implied search tool.

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