ojp_introspect_job_posting

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool extracts a summary, but does not explicitly confirm read-only nature, side effects, or authorization requirements. The return values are listed, but potential limitations or prerequisites are omitted.

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 sentences with no waste. Verb-first structure ('Extract...') immediately conveys purpose. Well-suited for an AI agent's quick comprehension.

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 the tool's scope (simple introspection of OJP documents), the description covers input options and output structure. No output schema exists, but the listed fields provide sufficient context. Sibling tools are different enough that confusion is unlikely.

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 explains both parameters. The description merely restates that either filePath or document can be used, adding no deeper semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Verb 'Extract' clearly identifies tool action on OJP documents. Returns structured summary with specific fields (requirements, compensation, etc.). Distinguishes from sibling tools that validate or parse.

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?

Implies usage for getting a summary from an OJP document, and mentions 'Provide either filePath or document' as input guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings like ojp_validate_job_posting or ojp_parse_job_posting.

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