get_job

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It implies a read operation via 'retrieve' and lists return contents, but does not explicitly confirm it's non-destructive or mention error handling (e.g., invalid ID). Adequate for a simple get-by-ID 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 concise sentences: first defines purpose and scope, second provides usage guidance. No unnecessary words; all content 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?

Given a single parameter, no output schema, and a simple retrieval operation, the description is complete. It explains what is returned (full details, description, interview stages) and the prerequisite workflow, leaving no gaps for the agent.

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 covers id with 'Job ID' description (100% coverage). The description adds context by linking id to the workflow ('when you already have the job ID'), reinforcing its use without needing extra format details.

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 clearly states 'Retrieve full details of a specific job by ID', specifying the verb and resource. It mentions included fields (description, interview stages) and distinguishes from sibling search_jobs via the usage hint.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use ('when you already have the job ID') and when not to ('to find a job by title, use search_jobs first'), providing a clear alternative tool.

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