Search Glassdoor job listings by job title and location to find estimated posting dates and hiring leads.
Search job listings with estimated posting dates from Glassdoor. Backed by captainhandsome/glassdoor-jobs-scraper.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| location | No | e.g. 'Austin, TX' or 'Remote' | |
| job_title | Yes | e.g. 'Software Engineer' | |
| max_results | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It reveals the data source (a third-party scraper) and the estimated-date quirk, but omits rate limits, pagination, auth needs, and failure modes for a scraper-backed 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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action. The scraper attribution consumes half the text without helping invocation, a minor waste.
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 3-param read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose and source but leaves return shape, result limits, and scraper behavior unaddressed.
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 coverage is 67%, with location and job_title documented via examples while max_results has only a default. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb (search) and resource (job listings) from a named source (Glassdoor), and adds that it returns estimated posting dates. It doesn't differentiate from siblings, though siblings are all in unrelated domains, so differentiation isn't needed.
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?
No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, no mention of alternatives. The description only says what it does, not when an agent should pick this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.