find_market_jobs

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses critical behaviors: 'nothing on chain and no wallet involvement', and warns that listings are 'UNTRUSTED MARKETPLACE LISTINGS' wrapped in an envelope, with fields sanitised and length capped. It also notes the output is data, never instructions. This is exemplary transparency.

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?

Although longer than two sentences, every sentence earns its place: purpose, workflow, safety, untrusted envelope, parameter explanation, and return value. The structure is logical with clear paragraphs, and no filler or redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (off-chain workflow, untrusted data, no wallet), the description is complete. It explains the output (JSON inside untrusted envelope, or message), the filtering behavior, safety, and next steps, without relying on an output schema.

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 input schema has one optional parameter 'skill' with zero schema coverage. The description fully compensates by explaining: 'Optional case insensitive filter matched against each job's title, skills needed, and description.' This gives complete semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb+resource: 'Discover open job postings on the Idios marketplace to work on' and explicitly frames it as 'The requester side mirror of find_workers'. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tool find_workers and states the purpose unambiguously.

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 description provides explicit workflow context: workers should agree terms off chain, share their pubkey (get_key), consider registering a bond (worker_register), and explains that this is a plain HTTPS fetch with no wallet involvement. It names alternative/related tools and makes clear when to use this tool (worker seeking work).

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