Indeed Search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must convey whether the tool is safe, read-only, synchronous, rate-limited, etc. It only says 'Search Indeed,' which is minimal and does not disclose any behavioral traits such as async execution modes, webhook behavior, or result delivery. Since the schema includes async, webhook, and enrichment parameters, the description omits important behavioral context.

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 sentence with no unnecessary fluff, making it easy to read and front-loaded. However, the phrase 'with the documented /indeed-search endpoint' is not genuinely helpful because the endpoint is not documented here, so it adds little value. It is concise but slightly under-specified in content.

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 has 7 parameters, including execution_mode, webhook, enrichment, and output schema, the one-sentence description is inadequate. It does not explain when to use async vs sync, what enrichment options exist, or how webhooks are used. While the output schema exists and the schema covers parameter definitions, the overall context for effective use is missing.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all 7 parameters, including their types, required status, and some details (e.g., execution_mode values, webhook format). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool searches Indeed, which distinguishes it from the many other search tools in the sibling list (e.g., google_search, tripadvisor_search). However, it adds the vague phrase 'with the documented /indeed-search endpoint' without actually documenting the endpoint, and it does not describe what 'Indeed' refers to or what kind of results are returned. It is clear enough for a basic purpose but not as rich as a top-tier description.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives, nor any mention of when not to use it. The sibling list includes several other search tools, but the description does not explain what makes indeed_search the preferred choice. This is a clear gap in usage guidance.

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