View Digests

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds beyond this by stating digests are 'delayed' and 'less interactive' compared to real-time data, giving valuable behavioral traits like staleness and purpose constraints.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose, then adds usage guidelines and behavioral notes. It is concise at about three sentences, though the phrase 'For weekly email summaries only' is slightly redundant with the first sentence. Still very efficient.

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 parameters, no output schema, and complete annotations, the description covers all necessary information: purpose, return limit, usage context, and behavioral caveats. It is fully sufficient for an agent to decide when and how to invoke it.

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, so schema coverage is 100% and no parameter explanation is needed. Baseline is 4, and the description adds no parameter info, which is perfectly acceptable.

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 the tool retrieves 'user's job digests — weekly email summaries of new jobs from their starred companies' and specifies it returns the '20 most recent digests.' This verb+resource+scope combination distinguishes it well from siblings like get_starred_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 explicitly advises when to use this tool: 'Only use this tool if the user specifically asks about their digests or email summaries.' It contrasts with get_starred_jobs for real-time searching and notes the delay and lesser interactivity of digests, providing clear usage context.

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