hires_list_interviews

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

With no annotations, the description discloses pagination behavior ('Returns paginated results'), which is helpful. However, it doesn't mention ordering, default page size, or authentication requirements, and it doesn't add richer behavioral context beyond what the name implies.

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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the action and filter options, ending with pagination. Every word serves a purpose; no filler.

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 list endpoint with no output schema, the description covers the core functionality: what it lists, filter options, and pagination. It doesn't describe response fields or error handling, but given schema coverage, it is adequate.

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?

All 10 parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage), so the description only summarizes them via filter categories. It adds minimal value by grouping filters into 'job, application, candidate, interviewer, date, or timestamps', which aligns with the schema descriptions.

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?

Clearly identifies the tool as listing interviews, with a specific verb and resource. Names the filter dimensions, which distinguishes it from generic listing tools, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools like hires_list_candidate_interviews.

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?

States optional filters and the incremental sync use case, giving clear context for when to use. Does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the conditions are well understood from the purpose.

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