get_job_post_custom_locations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden: it declares 'Read-only' and discloses the exact return envelope, plus contextualizes custom locations as per-job-board dropdown values. It omits pagination/auth notes, but for a single read tool this is substantial disclosure.

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?

Front-loads the purpose, then adds scope, return shape, sibling routing, and ID sourcing in tight, non-redundant lines. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

With one parameter, 100% schema coverage, a read-only nature, and sibling routing all covered, an agent has everything needed to select and invoke this correctly. An output schema exists, so return-shape detail is a bonus rather than a gap.

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% and the sole parameter's description already documents where to get job_post_id. The description restates that sourcing hint but adds 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get the custom-list locations selected on a job post') and explicitly distinguishes itself from get_job_post, which returns all location types. The agent can tell this narrow tool apart from its broad sibling without opening a schema.

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?

Names the alternative and the condition that selects it ('For all of a post's locations ... use get_job_post') and gives the prerequisite for the ID ('To find job_post_id: list_job_posts_for_job'). When-to-use and how-to-source-the-argument are both explicit.

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