linkfetch_search_jobs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose meaningful behavior: the non-obvious constraint that at least one filter must be supplied (the schema declares zero required params, so this cannot be inferred), plus paginated compact summaries. It omits auth expectations and rate-limit behavior, which sibling safety tools hint are relevant here.

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, no filler, and the capability summary is front-loaded before the two operational constraints. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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 an 18-parameter search with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the required-filter rule, the return shape (paginated compact summaries) and the geo-resolution dependency. Remaining gaps are auth and rate-limit context, which adjacent safety tools appear to own.

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 each of the 18 params carries its own description, so the baseline is 3. The description's filter list and geo_id-precedence note largely restate what the schema already documents for geo_id and location.

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 and resource ('Search LinkedIn job postings') and enumerates the exact filter dimensions available, making it immediately distinguishable from read-one siblings like linkfetch_get_job, linkfetch_get_job_by_url and linkfetch_get_job_applicants.

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?

Gives two concrete operating rules: 'At least one filter is required' and the routing advice to resolve geo via linkfetch_search_locations or fall back to free-text location. It stops short of naming when to use this tool versus the get_job siblings, but the search-vs-fetch split is self-evident from the resource name.

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