generate_cover_letter

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool generates a letter but does not mention whether it saves data, modifies anything, or requires specific permissions. The output format is not described, leaving uncertainty about the tool's behavior beyond generation.

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 a single concise sentence with no unnecessary wording. It is front-loaded with the key action. However, it is very brief and could include more detail without losing conciseness.

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?

The tool has nested objects and no output schema. The description does not explain what the return value is (e.g., a string of the cover letter) or any constraints on the input objects. For a moderately complex tool, this is insufficient to fully guide an agent.

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 input schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's descriptions of 'candidate_profile', 'job', and 'tone'. The baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the semantic load.

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 identifies the tool's function: generating a cover letter for a specific job based on a candidate profile. The verb 'generate' and resource 'cover letter' are specific. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'generate_follow_up' or 'auto_apply', which have distinct purposes.

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 implies usage when a cover letter is needed, but it lacks explicit context on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, making the guidance adequate but minimal.

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