Get master CV

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the return value (parsed CV with stable IDs) but does not mention side effects, auth requirements, or format details. Since it's a read operation with zero parameters, basic behavior is clear but lacks depth.

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?

Single sentence that conveys the entire purpose without any superfluous words. Front-loads the action and key details.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what the tool returns. Could be improved by specifying the output format or linking to related tools, but is adequate for the simplicity.

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?

No parameters exist, schema coverage is 100%. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description adds no parameter information as none is needed.

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?

Clearly states the tool returns a parsed master CV (cv.md) with stable IDs for tailoring. The verb 'Return' is specific, and the resource and scope are precisely defined, distinguishing it from sibling tools like prepare_tailoring or render_and_compile.

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?

Implies usage before tailoring by mentioning 'stable ids used for tailoring', but no explicit when-to-use or alternatives are given. Sibling tools exist but no guidance on selection.

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