get_job

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the fields that come back, but that is largely duplicated by the output schema, and it says nothing about error behavior for invalid/expired job IDs or whether saved-job state is included.

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?

A single compact sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded; every clause carries information. The parenthetical field list is somewhat redundant with the output schema but is not wasteful enough to hurt.

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 one-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description covers what is returned and where the ID comes from. Missing pieces are minor: no mention of failure modes or that application status may be stale relative to update_status.

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%, so the schema itself gives no meaning for job_id. The description partially compensates by indicating the ID originates from search results, but it does not state the expected format or whether IDs expire, leaving a real gap for the single required parameter.

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 resource (a job) and scope (full details: description, tags, application status), and the phrase 'from search results' distinguishes it from search_jobs. It does not, however, explicitly separate itself from match_job_to_profile or save_job, which also operate on a single 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?

'From search results' implies the job_id comes from search_jobs, giving an implied usage context. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no exclusion ('do not use to fetch multiple jobs'), and no mention of alternatives such as match_job_to_profile.

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