search_jobs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It lacks details on read-only nature, pagination behavior, rate limits, or parameter interactions. The description merely restates the purpose without safety or side-effect information.

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, front-loaded with the main action and a clear follow-up about the return value. No extraneous text.

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 12 parameters and no output schema, the description is somewhat sparse. It mentions the returned job_search_id but not other potential return fields. It provides minimal context for parameter usage, leaving detail to the schema.

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 no additional parameter meaning is necessary. The description lists a few parameter types (title, keyword, location, date) but does not clarify relationships or constraints beyond the schema. Baseline score 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?

Description clearly states the tool searches job postings across companies with filters like title, keyword, location, and date. It also notes the return value (job_search_id) and its link to lookup_job, distinguishing it from sibling lookup tools.

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 mentions the returned job_search_id is for use with lookup_job, implying a sequential usage pattern. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or contrast it with other search siblings like search_ads.

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