Add Experience

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

The description offers minimal behavioral transparency. It only states the action without mentioning side effects, authorization needs, or constraints. Since no annotations are present, the description carries the full burden, which it does not meet.

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 extremely concise at one sentence. While not verbose, it lacks structure and additional information that could be easily included without being lengthy.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema and the simple nature of an add operation, the description is minimally complete. However, it does not cover constraints like date ordering or behavior when duplicates exist.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as relationships between fields or formatting expectations. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Add a new work experience entry' clearly states the tool's action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling add tools through the specific resource type, though it could be more descriptive.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. With many sibling add tools, there is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_certification or add_project.

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