save_job

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the save action and destination, but does not disclose behavior for duplicate saves, whether it creates or updates a record, prerequisites like requiring active search results, or side effects. This is a significant gap for a mutation 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It conveys the core operation efficiently and earns its place.

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 relatively simple save operation with an output schema, the description conveys the basic purpose, but it lacks details about duplicate handling, prerequisites, and parameter usage. With no annotations and incomplete parameter guidance, it is only minimally viable.

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 0%, and the description does not mention 'job_id' or 'notes'. While the schema defines required fields and defaults, the description adds no meaning about what values to pass or how they affect the saved job.

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 ('Save') and identifies both the source ('from the latest search results') and destination ('to the local tracker'), making it clear what the tool does. This also distinguishes it from siblings like 'add_job' or 'list_saved_jobs' by specifying the origin of the job.

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 phrase 'from the latest search results' implies when to use this tool, but the description does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives such as 'add_job' or 'update_job_status'. It provides context but lacks exclusionary guidance.

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