Greenhouse MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states a read operation ('Get') but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or output format. This is inadequate for a tool with no annotation coverage, as it omits critical behavioral traits.

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 a single, direct sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core action, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick understanding.

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's low complexity (one parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description is minimally complete. However, with no annotations and a vague purpose, it lacks depth for full contextual understanding, though the output schema mitigates some gaps.

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?

The description doesn't add any parameter information beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. Since there's only one parameter and the schema defines it as an integer 'section_id', the baseline is 3—adequate given minimal parameters but no extra semantic context provided.

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 states the verb ('Get') and resource ('a single prospect post section'), which clarifies the basic purpose. However, it's vague about what a 'prospect post section' is and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_prospect_post_sections' or 'get_job_post', missing specificity for clear distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, context for use, or compare to sibling tools such as 'list_prospect_post_sections', leaving the agent without direction on appropriate usage scenarios.

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