get_job_post

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It helpfully labels the operation 'Read-only' and enumerates the returned fields, which conveys a safe non-mutating profile. It says nothing about permissions, visibility rules for deactivated posts, or rate limits, so the disclosure is adequate but not rich.

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 definition is brief and front-loads the core operation before the return list and the ID hint. Every sentence serves a purpose, though the enumerated return fields are partly redundant with the available output schema.

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 single-parameter read tool with an output schema already present, the description covers the essentials: what it returns, that it is read-only, and where to get the ID. Nothing critical is missing, though clarifying its relationship to get_job_post_for_job would make it fully 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 coverage is 100%, so the single parameter's meaning and source are already documented in the schema. The description's 'by ID' and the ID-sourcing hint add marginal value but no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Get a job post by ID'), making the operation immediately clear. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the close sibling get_job_post_for_job, so an agent still can't fully disambiguate from the description alone.

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 provides a useful pointer for sourcing the required ID ('To find post IDs: list_job_posts_for_job'), which is implied usage guidance tied to the parameter. It stops short of stating when to prefer this tool over get_job_post_for_job or list_job_posts, so the when-to-use logic is only partially covered.

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