purge_dead_listings

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It clearly states the tool modifies scouted_jobs.json (destructive), explains detection logic, and notes that connection errors/5xx are kept. It also describes the dry_run safety mechanism. No contradictions.

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 efficiently cover purpose, logic, and dry_run. Front-loaded with main action, no fluff. Every sentence adds essential 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?

No output schema, but description explains return behavior (modification or dry-run preview). Covers detection logic, error handling, and parameter use. Complete for a cleanup tool with simple I/O.

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 already describes dry_run as boolean to check without modifying. Description adds value by explaining what dry_run does: preview removals without deletion. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3, but the additional clarity raises it to 4.

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?

Description clearly states the tool checks job URLs for liveness and removes expired/unavailable postings from scouted_jobs.json. It specifies the action (purge), resource (dead listings), and format (scouted_jobs.json). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_scouted_jobs (read-only) and save_scouted_job (add).

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?

Description provides clear context for when to use: to clean up dead listings from scouted jobs. It details detection methods (HTTP status codes, closure phrases) and warns about false positives (keeping on 5xx/errors). It also introduces dry_run for preview. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, though the context implies it's for maintenance.

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