linkedin_add_experience

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

Adds behavioral details beyond annotations: company names are matched against LinkedIn's company directory, and ongoing roles require current=true with no end date. This gives the agent insight into expected validation behavior. No contradiction with annotations.

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 sentences totaling 31 words. Front-loaded with the core purpose, then provides key behavioral notes. No wasted words.

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 rich input schema and annotations, the description is sufficient for an add tool. It covers the main purpose and important matching behavior, though it doesn't discuss failure modes or specifics of the output (no output schema exists).

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 90%, and the relevant parameters (current, endMonth, etc.) are already described in the input schema. The description's guidance on current/end date largely repeats the schema's own notes, so it adds little semantic value beyond what the schema provides.

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 'Add a work experience entry to the profile' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling add_* tools by explicitly mentioning work experience and the company directory matching behavior.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use—adding a work experience entry—and gives a concrete usage guideline (set current=true and omit end date for ongoing roles). Does not explicitly name alternatives, but the purpose is sufficiently clear.

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