render_resume

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

Without annotations, the description must convey behavior. It mentions external dependencies (Google Chrome, qpdf) and the return format (one_page field, pdf_path), but omits error cases or side effects like file creation. This is adequate but not thorough.

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 three terse sentences, each packed with distinct information: action, return value, and prerequisites/pipeline role. No redundancy, perfectly front-loaded.

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 simplicity of the tool (1 param, output schema exists), the description covers the main behavioral aspects: rendering, return fields, dependencies, and pipeline position. It is slightly incomplete on parameter constraints but overall sufficient.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage for the single 'name' parameter. The description adds meaning by indicating it is used as '<name>.html', implying it's a base filename. This is helpful but minimal, leaving ambiguity about path or format.

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 it renders an HTML file named '<name>.html' to PDF and reports page count, which distinguishes it from siblings like 'build_resume' and 'verify_resume'. The verb 'render' and resource 'HTML to PDF' are specific.

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 positions the tool as 'the first of the 4 gates', implying it should be used early in a pipeline. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, limiting guidance for selection among siblings.

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