Retrieve one gig post by postId to review the work opportunity and view applicants with their profiles and track records.
One gig post. The employer of the post also sees every applicant with their profile and track record.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| postId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It adds one visibility note (the employer sees applicants with profiles and track records), but does not state whether the operation is read-only, what permissions are required, what the response contains, or how errors are handled.
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 and is front-loaded. However, the first sentence is an incomplete purpose statement ('One gig post.'), which slightly weakens the structure despite the overall brevity.
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 retrieval tool with no output schema, no annotations, and an undocumented required parameter, the description is incomplete. It does not describe the return value, access requirements, or the parameter's role, leaving key context missing.
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% for the single required parameter postId, and the description does not explain the parameter's meaning or expected format. With low schema coverage, the description should compensate, but it provides no information about postId.
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 identifies the resource as 'One gig post' but does not state the action (retrieve/get) beyond what the tool name implies. It fails to distinguish the tool from siblings like get_gig, list_gig_posts, or post_gig, leaving the purpose vague despite the identifiable noun.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to use it, or which sibling to choose instead. The description offers no context such as 'use this to fetch a single gig post by ID' or 'for lists use list_gig_posts'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.