Four tools with complete schemas and descriptions. Naming follows verb_noun pattern (resolve_, search_, get_, list_). Descriptions are adequate (50-100 chars) but lack actionable context for LLM selection. Parameters are typed and described, but lack enums for constrained values (e.g., filter types, commitment types). Output schemas are defined in separate files but not visible in provided source. Error handling and recovery guidance are absent. Tool composition is sound, each has one responsibility and outputs chain to downstream tools (resolve_company → search_jobs → get_job). No security issues detected (read-only, no secrets). Baseline: 549 production tools average 18-char names (these: 14-20 chars, good); 194-char descriptions (these: 50-100 chars, below baseline but acceptable); 100% of A+ tools have param descriptions (these: 100% present).

• Expand tool descriptions to 100-150 chars. Example for resolve_company: 'Resolve a company name to its Lever board site name and instance. Required before search_jobs or list_filter_values. Returns 404 if the company is not on Lever; try a different name or search for similar companies.'
• Add enum constraints to search_jobs 'commitment' parameter and list_filter_values 'filter' parameter. Declare valid values explicitly: commitment: ['full-time', 'part-time', 'contract', 'temporary', 'internship'] and filter: ['location', 'team', 'department', 'commitment'].
• Document parameter dependencies in descriptions. E.g., 'company_slug and instance are returned by resolve_company, call that first if you only have a company name.'
• Add pagination guidance to search_jobs description: 'Results are paginated. Use limit (1-100) and skip (0-1000) to navigate. Returns total count so the agent can plan multi-page fetches.'
• Include error recovery hints in tool descriptions. E.g., 'If no results are found, try list_filter_values to see available locations/teams/departments for that company, then refine your search.'