export_json_resume

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

Annotations only tell the agent it is a non-read-only, non-destructive, closed-world write; the description adds substantive behavior beyond that: the honesty filtering rule (X skills never appear, F skills only in a Familiarity group), the write destination and its default, and the returned path. This is genuinely useful context the structured fields do not carry.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose, then the alternative, then the behavioral rule, then the output detail. Every sentence carries distinct information with 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 4-parameter write tool with no output schema, the description covers what is produced (a JSON Resume file), where it is written (out_dir with default), what is returned (path), and the content-filtering rule. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents lang, out_dir, profile, and variant. The description restates the out_dir default and return path but adds no new parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb (export) and resource (a CV variant as a JSON Resume file) with the target audience/format named. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling build_cv, which produces PDF/DOCX, so an agent can route between the two without opening schemas.

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?

Gives an explicit alternative: 'Use build_cv for a PDF or DOCX instead.' This is exactly the when-to-use-this-vs-sibling guidance the dimension rewards, with the format condition that selects each tool made clear.

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