List Keka Job Titles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is established. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating the return value (list of job titles with IDs and names) and documenting pagination behavior through pageNumber and pageSize. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is concise and well-organized with a clear opening sentence followed by Args and Returns sections. Every part is useful, though the Args section duplicates schema information and could be shortened without losing meaning.

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 simple read-only list tool with three optional parameters and rich annotations, the description provides enough to call the tool correctly: it explains pagination, output format, and expected return content. The main missing context is how this relates to the sibling 'keka_list_jobs' tool, but overall it is 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents all three parameters. The description's Args section largely repeats the schema information (page number, page size, response format) without adding meaning beyond what is already structured. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the operation ('Retrieve all job titles configured in Keka HRM') with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'keka_list_jobs', which could be confused with listing job titles, so it misses some sibling differentiation.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as keka_list_jobs or other list_* siblings. The description implies 'use this to get job titles' but provides no exclusions or comparison to related tools.

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