score_job

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It explains return values (value, pursue, reasons, hard_cap) and hard_cap conditions. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or has no side effects, which would be helpful.

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 five sentences with no fluff. The first sentence states the core purpose, and subsequent sentences efficiently add detail on parameters and return values.

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?

For a tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the return structure and hard_cap conditions. It lacks explanation of the 'angle' parameter and the rubric, but the output schema compensates for return structure.

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 adds some meaning by explaining that jd_text is preferred and that title is required. It does not explain url, angle, company, or location, leaving their semantics unclear.

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 scores a role 0-10 against FIT_RUBRIC.md and returns a pursue verdict. The verb 'score' and resource 'role' are specific, and the tool is well-differentiated from siblings like discover_jobs or build_resume.

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?

It advises passing JD text when available because titles under- and over-sell, giving clear context on preferred input. It lacks explicit exclusions or comparisons to alternatives, but the guidance is actionable.

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