search_jobs

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: 20 results per page, pagination support via page, a has_next indicator, and the shape of returned job fields.

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 front-loaded with the tool purpose, followed by a clean Args section and a brief return/next-step note. Every sentence adds actionable information with no redundant restatement of the name or schema.

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 seven-parameter, zero-description-coverage search tool, the definition is complete enough to invoke correctly. It covers pagination, filtering constraints, slug sourcing, salary units, remote modes, and where to go for job details, despite an output schema also being present.

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 description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly. It documents all seven parameters with examples, slug sources, units, enum meanings, defaults, and the mutual-exclusion rule between location and category.

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 and resource: search Profesia.sk job offers, with the page size disclosed. It clearly separates itself from get_job by noting that detailed descriptions require that sibling, and it references list_locations and list_job_categories for slug inputs.

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?

Gives strong contextual guidance: location and category must come from list_locations and list_job_categories, only one of location/category can be used, and get_job should be used for full descriptions. It does not explicitly state when to prefer search_jobs over scrape_jobs or company_jobs, but the primary routing guidance is clear.

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