get_company_jobs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that only currently-open roles are returned, along with the profile, and clarifies the slug format. However, it does not mention failure modes, permissions, or rate limits. The added context is reasonable for a simple read operation but not comprehensive.

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 sentence of 36 words, front-loads the primary function, and includes only essential details about the slug format. There is no redundant or filler content.

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 the tool has only one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential information: what is returned (profile and open roles) and how to specify the company. It lacks details on edge cases like invalid slugs, but for a simple lookup this is adequate.

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 schema already documents the parameter with examples (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the slug format (lowercase, hyphenated) and tying it to the URL structure, which goes beyond the schema's examples.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a well-defined resource (a specific company's profile and currently-open roles), and the exact identifier format (slug). It clearly distinguishes from the sibling 'search_jobs' by focusing on a single company rather than a search across companies.

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 the use case (when you have a specific company slug) and provides the URL context for slug format, but it does not explicitly mention the alternative 'search_jobs' or state when to use one over the other. The usage is implied rather than explicit.

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