list_jobs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. 'Query stored jobs' implies a read-only action, but it does not disclose behavior such as whether results are paginated, how the query is interpreted, what the default return set looks like, or any side effects. The description addresses purpose but not behavioral detail.

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 two short sentences with no filler; the main purpose is front-loaded. It is appropriately concise, though its brevity trades away useful detail that is counted under other dimensions.

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 six optional parameters, no annotations, and no parameter descriptions, the description is too sparse to be complete. An output schema exists, so return values are partially covered, but the tool's selection criteria and filtering semantics are not explained.

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 0%, and the description adds no meaning for any of the six parameters. An agent is left with only parameter names and defaults to guess how 'fit', 'search', 'status', 'company', and 'min_score' interact.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Query stored jobs') and adds a distinguishing note ('Use this instead of re-searching a portal') that separates it from a portal-searching sibling. It is clear but does not name the sibling explicitly, so it falls just short of full differentiation.

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 sentence 'Use this instead of re-searching a portal' provides direct guidance on when to select this tool over a portal search. It gives a clear context but does not name a specific sibling tool or list any exclusion cases beyond the portal-search scenario.

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