fetch_jobs

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

With no annotations available, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does state the tool filters, scores, and stores data (indicating a write operation) and returns a per-source breakdown. However, it omits caveats like duration, potential to overwrite existing data, or prerequisites such as API keys.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the core action, enumerates the sources, and specifies the return value. No filler or redundancy.

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 output schema, the description includes a minimal but sufficient return value ('per-source breakdown'). It outlines the entire process from scrape to store, though it does not explain what the '4-gate filter' or 'score' mean, nor any operational prerequisites. Still, for a parameterless tool, it provides adequate context.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is empty. Per the baseline for zero-parameter tools, the description does not need to add parameter details. It correctly focuses entirely on the action.

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 states a specific verb ('Scrape'), names the exact resource (all 6 job sources with names), and describes the full pipeline (filter, score, store). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that operate on existing job data, such as search_jobs and filter_jobs.

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 this is the ingestion tool, contrasting with siblings that query or list already-stored jobs. However, it does not explicitly provide when-to-use vs. when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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