job_tool

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses behavioral traits such as the default action and required fields for different search modes (e.g., city/location always required, differences between job_title+city and company+city). However, it does not explicitly state whether the tool is read-only or mention rate limits, auth, or side effects.

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 well-structured with clear instructions per action, but is somewhat lengthy. Each sentence earns its place, though minor redundancy exists (e.g., emphasizing default action twice). Overall, it's concise enough given the complexity.

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 tool with 5 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description covers core usage but lacks details on refine_recommendations and parameters. It does not describe return values or expected output, which is a gap given the absence of an output schema.

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 60%. The description adds significant meaning for the action enum and search_jobs object (e.g., required fields, mode differences). However, refine_recommendations and parameters lack any description beyond being objects, missing an opportunity to fully compensate for the coverage gaps.

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 the tool's default action is to find job listings via search, and explains three distinct actions (search, refine, detail). It instructs not to use any other tool for this purpose, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools career_tool and resume_tool, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use each action: search as default (or when starting), refine after prior results/feedback, and detail with a specific job_id. It also clarifies when to include resume_text/user_profile, demonstrating clear context for selection.

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