get_job_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes what information is retrieved but does not disclose behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or whether the data is cached. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists key details without waste. Every part earns its place by specifying the resource and content retrieved.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or behavioral constraints, which are crucial for a tool that interacts with external data. This leaves gaps in understanding how to use the tool effectively.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the 'job_url' parameter. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by implying the URL is for a LinkedIn job posting, but does not provide additional syntax or format details. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'full details of a specific LinkedIn job posting', listing specific content like description, requirements, salary range, and apply link. It distinguishes from siblings like 'search_jobs' (which likely returns multiple results) and 'get_profile' (which targets user profiles).

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 description implies usage for retrieving details of a specific job posting, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_jobs' (for finding jobs) or 'get_profile' (for user data). It provides some context but lacks explicit exclusions or comparisons.

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