discover_jobs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that the tool queries public APIs or private scripts, returns ranked de-duped results, and mentions failure modes for private sources. This provides sufficient transparency about the tool's behavior and side effects.

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 front-loaded with a clear one-liner summarizing the tool's purpose, then uses a structured bullet-like format for parameter explanations. Every sentence adds value, and there is no fluff. It is concise yet comprehensive.

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 presence of an output schema (context signals indicate yes), the description doesn't need to detail return values, but it still lists the fields. It covers all parameters, usage context (pairing with other tools), and behavior. For a tool with 3 optional parameters, this is 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does excellently. It explains the 'angle' parameter as a search lens, 'source' as which sweep (with detailed options and behaviors), and 'limit' as max roles. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's default values.

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's purpose: 'Find fresh roles from a discovery source, ranked by fit, de-duped by role.' This is a specific verb+resource with additional details (ranked, de-duped) that distinguishes it from siblings like fetch_job_description and search_jobs.

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 context for when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'For a much wider net, pair this with the JobDataLake MCP (search_jobs) and feed its results to score_job.' It also explains the different source options and their behaviors. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use, the guidance is clear and helpful.

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