Get Job Details

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description does not contradict these and adds minimal behavioral context (e.g., no mention of rate limits or response structure). With annotations present, the description's lack of additional detail is acceptable.

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 concise sentence that efficiently conveys the purpose. It is front-loaded and to the point, although it could be slightly more informative without verbosity.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the essential purpose and differentiates from sibling tools, though it could mention the output format or typical use case after search_jobs for full completeness.

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 coverage is 100% and the description provides a clear example for the job_id parameter. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, which is adequate given full coverage. No additional parameter insights are provided.

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 gets job details for a specific LinkedIn job posting, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_jobs, which searches for jobs rather than retrieving details.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it doesn't suggest using this after search_jobs or explain how it differs from similar get tools like get_company_profile. The user must infer usage context.

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