Search startup jobs on Wellfound (AngelList Talent)

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

Annotations already declare read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds important context beyond annotations: it runs a named Apify Actor on the user's account, costs about $0.002 per job, and caps spend at $0.5 per call.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first clause and the cost disclosure is compact. The long list of returned fields is somewhat redundant because an output schema exists, but the description remains information-dense rather than bloated.

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 cost-incurring open-world scraper, the description covers source, cost/cap, and output fields, while the output schema handles return structure. It still omits explicit guidance on choosing this tool over the many sibling job-search tools and says little about extra_input.

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 role, city, remote, max_items, and extra_input. The description reinforces role/city/remote semantics but adds no extra constraints or format details beyond the schema.

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, resource, and source: startup jobs from Wellfound by role and city or remote. The Wellfound/startup framing distinguishes it from generic job-search siblings, and the listed result fields make the scope concrete.

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 implies usage through "by role and city, or remote," but it does not name alternatives such as search_indeed_jobs, search_tech_jobs, or find_remote_jobs. It also gives no explicit when-not-to-use guidance, so sibling routing is left to inference.

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