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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating a safe read operation, which is consistent with the description. The description adds the detail about application summaries, which is useful but does not disclose other behaviors like pagination or full data scope. Since annotations cover the basic safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

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 a single concise sentence that effectively communicates the tool's purpose without any fluff. It gets straight to the point, and every word adds value.

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 simple retrieval tool with one parameter and clear annotations, the description is largely sufficient. The mention of application summaries gives useful context about what the response will include, though it does not detail other fields. Given the simplicity, a 4 is justified.

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?

The input schema already documents the 'id' parameter fully with data type and description, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides; thus, it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 'Get a candidate with application summaries' clearly states the verb and resource and adds some detail (application summaries). It distinguishes it from siblings like hires_get_candidate_resume, but it does not explicitly clarify its scope compared to hires_list_candidates. Hence 4.

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?

It is clear from the description that this tool is for fetching a single candidate's information, implying use when you need a specific candidate's details. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives like hires_get_candidate_resume or hires_list_candidates, so guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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