pandape_web_candidatos

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses the authentication method (web session/cookies), the lack of API credential requirement, and the output purpose (returns idMatch). However, it does not describe the response structure, pagination behavior, or error conditions, leaving notable gaps for a tool without an output schema.

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 three sentences, tightly focused, and front-loaded with the action and resource. Every sentence adds value: purpose, authentication context, output usage, and parameter sourcing. There is no fluff or repetition.

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 single-parameter list tool, the description covers the essential workflow: what it lists, how authentication works, how to identify the parameter, and what to do with the output. It is slightly incomplete because it does not describe the return format or list size, but given the low complexity and the direct pointer to pandape_web_cv, it is reasonably complete.

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 schema already covers the parameter with a basic description, and the main description adds meaningful detail by explaining how to find idVacante from the ATS URL (/Company/Match/Matches/<idVacante>). This goes beyond the schema's generic description and provides actionable location guidance.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Lista los candidatos de una vacante' (lists candidates for a vacancy) using a specific scope (web session/cookies). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly mentioning the web-session mechanism and by noting it returns idMatch values for later use with pandape_web_cv.

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?

The description provides clear context: use when you have web session cookies and no API credentials, and use it to obtain idMatch values before reading CVs with pandape_web_cv. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool compared to other sibling tools like pandape_api, so it stops short of full alternative/exclusion guidance.

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