discover_jobs

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions that network calls are made and returns a list of job dicts. However, it does not disclose any side effects, auth requirements, or rate limits. For a read-like operation, this is acceptable but could be more explicit.

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 moderately concise, with a main sentence and an Args block. Each sentence adds value, but the Args block is slightly unstructured (lines after the colon). Still, it's efficient.

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 has an output schema (not shown) but the description explicitly lists return fields (title, company, etc.) and mentions network calls. This covers the key aspects for an agent to understand inputs, outputs, and behavior.

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 0%, but the description adds significant meaning: it explains angle as a search lens from SEARCH_ANGLES.md, source options with yield descriptions, and limit as max roles. This compensates for the schema lacking descriptions.

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 'Find fresh roles from a discovery source, ranked by fit, de-duped by role.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_applications and score_job by focusing on job discovery.

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 explains each parameter (angle, source, limit) and their values, including where to find angle options. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool over alternatives like list_applications or score_job.

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