List Saved Searches

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive behavior, and closed-world scope. The description adds useful context beyond annotations by stating it spends no credits and by naming the returned fields, though it does not discuss pagination or output limits.

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?

It is mostly front-loaded and efficient, but the final sentence ('Next: getmattered_get_matches for the jobs that match now') repeats the preceding 'use getmattered_get_matches' guidance without adding new information. That redundancy costs some conciseness.

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 an output schema present, zero parameters, and annotations covering safety, the description supplies everything needed for correct invocation: purpose, returned fields, read-only/credit behavior, and the alternative tool for job matches.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the parameter-semantics baseline is 4. The description correctly does not introduce nonexistent parameters and requires no parameter interpretation.

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?

Starts with a specific verb and resource: 'List the user's saved searches,' then enumerates exactly what each item contains. It clearly distinguishes itself from the matching/job-listing sibling and from create/update/delete saved-search siblings by calling out that it is a read-only listing.

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 says 'Do not use it to see jobs; use getmattered_get_matches' and repeats the next step to take. This gives the agent both an exclusion and the correct alternative, which is exactly what selection guidance should do.

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