buscar_vagas

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior, but it only mentions 'filtros opcionais'. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, how results are paginated or returned, or any external service implications. This leaves significant behavioral ambiguity.

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 one-sentence description is efficient and front-loaded, immediately conveying the core purpose. However, it is extremely terse and omits details that could be added without bloating the text, making it appropriately concise for its limited scope.

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?

The description is incomplete for a tool with 7 optional parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. It fails to mention return values, pagination behavior, or defaults beyond a few schema descriptions, leaving critical gaps for an agent to invoke and interpret results correctly.

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?

The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, merely noting 'filtros opcionais'. With 3 of 7 parameters lacking schema descriptions (jobTypes, companyId, and the workplaceTypes array), the description fails to compensate for these gaps, leaving the agent without clarity on those parameter semantics.

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 the tool's function: searching public job openings on Gupy with optional filters. The verb 'Busca' and resource 'vagas públicas' make it distinct from sibling tools like 'detalhe_vaga' or 'monitorar', though it does not explicitly compare with them.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer usage context. There is no specification of when to prefer this over 'detalhe_vaga' or other siblings.

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