create_job

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Create' and returns JSON with details, missing side effects, permissions, idempotency, or error handling. This is minimal for a mutation 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?

The description is reasonably concise, using a clear list format for args and returns. It wastes few words but could be tightened by removing the 'Args:' and 'Returns:' headers if redundant.

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 4 parameters (1 required) and an output schema, the description covers all arguments and return type ('JSON string with details'). However, it omits error scenarios, prerequisites, or success conditions, making it adequate but not complete.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by providing basic semantics for all parameters: 'name: Job title/name (required)', 'company_name: Hiring company name', etc. It adds meaning beyond the schema but lacks detailed formats or constraints.

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 'Create a new job/position in Crelate', using a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('job/position'). It easily distinguishes from sibling tools like create_candidate or create_company.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives (e.g., update_job or list_jobs). Usage is implied by the tool name and resource, but no when-not-to-use or context is given.

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