Big 5 - interpretations, description, anything?

[mcpng]

I was reading that the Big 5 is more scientific and all. Well, something that's "better" is always better for us...
But thing is...I can't find any useful descriptions based on the big 5 that is not immediately obvious. For example, the best I would find is something like "You're high on openness, so you're more open to new experiences, more curious about things...et cetera...". It doesn't dissect further the way MBTI tells us stories like "ISTPs tend to need time alone to recharge, are generally interested and more talented in technical things, and suitable or preferred career choices include police work...they are quiet but may suddenly burst with energy, being some kind of closet daredevil"....etc

I mean, sure I know those descriptions of MBTI may be a bit stereotyping...but they aren't too bad. They do give some insights and as a reader, I can say...ah yes some parts resonate with me...whereas these parts don't.
Also, they aren't as BAD as horoscopes...because they don't just apply to anyone. I can read through all 16 profile types and quite firmly decide i'm not at least 12 of them perhaps...and roughly feel i'm more inclined to one out of the balance 4...

Thing about Big 5...where's any meaningful descriptions?

Does anyone know where to find??

I mean it would be great if...since it's "better" and more "scientific"...they could have stats like:

Person A (~20% on Openness, ~50% agreeableness, ~80% neuroticism, ~20% extraversion, 50% conscientiousness)
DESCRIPTION OF TYPICAL PERSON OF THIS TYPE,
DESCRIPTION OF TYPICAL DESIRES/WISHES/THOUGHTS OF THIS TYPE (based on maybe surveying such people)
DESCRIPTION OF TYPICAL JOBS WHERE THEY REPORT HIGH SATISFACTION
DESCRIPTION OF TYPICAL ....

 

[garbage]

The non-obvious Big 5 descriptions won't typically be found in isolated Big 5 descriptions. Its real (non-obvious) descriptive value is embedded in research surrounding the tool--those studies that have correlated, say, some actual behavior (in a loose sense, including stabs at cognition) to such-and-such a trait. For example, here's an actual thing about traits and behaviors in interaction.

The framework allows descriptions to emerge from empirical research.

 

[mcpng]

So then are there summaries online? Its kinda hard going thru an 18 page paper with stats tables to see the findings of 1 study...that had like just 200 participants...only about what was it...aggreableness with regard to a specific thing.