Resume Rewrite

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it specifies the returns (before/after rewrites, missing keywords, ATS tips), notes it's a premium tier feature, and indicates the resume upload requirement. No contradiction with readOnlyHint annotation.

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 brief, well-structured, and front-loaded. Every sentence adds critical information without redundancy.

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 tool has 3 parameters and an output schema, the description fully covers input preconditions, output summary, and usage context. It also mentions premium tier and prerequisites.

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 baseline 3. The description adds extra value by explaining that 'url' is a convenience alternative to 'domain'+'jobId', and that 'jobId' must be passed verbatim from search_jobs with '#' separators.

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 explicitly states the tool generates targeted resume bullet rewrites for a specific job using the user's resume and job description. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like interview_prep.

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 gives direct usage examples ('rewrite my resume for this Stripe role') and explicitly states when not to use it ('Not for interview preparation') with a named alternative (interview_prep). It also mentions the prerequisite of having a resume uploaded.

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