hcp_create_job

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

Discloses non-obvious behaviors that annotations do not cover: the API silently drops description on POST, and the tool later records it as an internal note. It also warns about cents-to-dollars conversion, which is the kind of side-effect an agent must know before calling.

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?

Three sentences, all substantive: the operation, the required customer identifier, and two caveats. The description is front-loaded and contains no fluff.

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?

The description captures the critical gotchas for hcp_create_job, but for a 9-parameter create tool with no schema descriptions, it still leaves scheduled_start/scheduled_end format, employee_ids/tags expectations, and the scope of the price conversion unstated. Output schema presence covers return shape, but invocation details remain only partially 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?

The schema has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It adds important meaning for customer_id (cus_ prefix) and description (silently dropped and stored as internal note), but it leaves the other seven parameters to their titles; formats and enumerations are still unspecified.

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?

Opens with 'Create a new job,' a specific verb-and-resource statement that leaves no ambiguity about the action. It is immediately distinguishable from siblings such as hcp_get_job, hcp_create_lead, and hcp_update_job_schedule.

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?

The only usage guidance is a hard prerequisite: customer_id must be provided with a cus_ prefix. It does not state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it, and no sibling exclusions are mentioned.

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