search_jobs

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It reveals that the search runs via browser automation and returns profile-matched listings, but says nothing about whether an authenticated session is required, expected latency, rate limits, or failure modes across eight external platforms — critical context for a scraping tool.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler; the platform list and mechanism come first, and the return content follows immediately. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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 a seven-parameter, zero-required, no-output-schema tool the description covers what is returned and across which platforms. It omits auth/session prerequisites and any note on result volume or pagination, which are material gaps given the browser-automation nature of the tool.

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 every one of the seven parameters is already documented (including the LinkedIn-only fetch_jd nuance), making baseline 3 appropriate. The description adds no parameter detail beyond what the schema states.

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 a specific verb ('Search for jobs'), names the eight source platforms, and notes the browser-automation mechanism and match scoring. It is clear on what the tool does, but it never distinguishes itself from the sibling filter_jobs, which an agent could easily confuse with the post-search narrowing step.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus filter_jobs, or on prerequisites such as being logged in (login_account, check_login_status, save_session are siblings). The only implicit usage signal is the default-all-platforms behavior, which lives in the schema, not the description.

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