update_job_post

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden and does well: it declares a write operation, an admin-only permission requirement, and a non-obvious destructive side effect (passing location replaces and removes the post's existing locations). It does not address what happens when no editable field is supplied or whether updates are reversible, so it stops short of full coverage.

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 purpose and the admin constraint in the first sentence, then layers in ID discovery and the location caveat. Every sentence carries information, though the multi-paragraph layout is slightly heavier than needed for four parameters.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. Combined with full schema coverage, admin/auth disclosure, ID provenance, and the location-replacement caveat, an agent has enough to call this correctly; only the empty-update and reversibility cases are unaddressed.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's location semantics and ID-discovery guidance largely restate or reinforce what the schema already says ('Replaces the post's existing locations'), adding routing value rather than new per-parameter meaning.

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 (Update) plus resource (job post) and enumerates the mutable fields (title, location, content), immediately distinguishing it from neighbors like update_job_post_status and add_job_post_location. The 'Write operation — admin only' clause further narrows scope.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: how to obtain job_post_id (list_job_posts_for_job → job_id from list_jobs → match by name), and when to prefer alternatives (add_job_post_location / remove_job_post_location for multiple or office-based locations). This is the when/when-not/alternatives pattern in full.

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