search_jobs

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility. It explains the search behavior, filtering options, pagination, and the effect of include_description (large output). It does not mention rate limits or auth, but the read-only nature is implicit.

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 structured with a clear summary, parameter list, and notes on return values and alternatives. It is slightly lengthy but each sentence adds value; could be more concise but remains effective.

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's 15 parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description covers search behavior, filtering, pagination, and return fields. It lacks details on error cases or output structure but is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 0%, but the description provides detailed explanations for all 15 parameters, including defaults and valid values. This far exceeds the minimum needed to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 it searches a 'live UK software/tech jobs board,' using the verb 'search' and specifying the resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_job and list_filters by detailing the comprehensive filtering and pagination capabilities.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool (for broad searches) and directs to use get_job for a single full record. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or exclude other contexts.

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