browse_jobs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the bar is lower; the description still adds 'no API key needed', the newest-first ordering, and the off-server application constraint, all of which affect how an agent acts on results. It does not state rate limits or what happens on empty results, but the important behavioral traits are covered.

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?

Front-loads the core verb and resource, then layers usage and alternatives in descending priority. Four sentences with almost no waste, though the returned-fields sentence is dense and could be trimmed if an output schema existed.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-shape burden and does: ID, title, category, budget, short description. Combined with pagination limits, the read-only/off-server constraints, and sibling routing, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 limit, category and budget_type, including the enum and the 'only first page' caveat. The description adds only the returned-field list and reiterates the limit cap, so baseline 3 is appropriate rather than credit for new parameter meaning.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Browse public job posts on GoHireHumans that are accepting applications, newest first'), including scope and ordering. It is immediately distinguishable from search_services, search_workers, and get_job_status, all of which are named in the 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?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('to find work to apply for or to see what buyers are asking for') plus a critical when-not: applications happen on gohirehumans.com, not through this server. It also routes to the correct siblings for hiring and for single-job status, with the selecting condition stated.

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