boss_ai_fit

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 mentions generating a report from local resume and cached jobs, implying a read operation, but does not state whether it is read-only, mutates state, requires permissions beyond availability, or how it handles missing cache. Insufficient for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 plus availability tag is front-loaded and concise. However, the availability tag contains a duplicated '可用性: 可用性:' and could be clearer. Otherwise no waste.

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 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the tool's purpose and output content (match score, gap, keyword hits). It also provides availability constraints. However, it lacks behavioral details and usage alternatives, leaving some gaps for correct invocation.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters (resume name, limit). The description adds no additional syntax or format details beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb (生成) and resource (逐岗匹配度、能力缺口和关键词命中报告) based on local resume and cached job details. Distinguishes from siblings like boss_ai_analyze_jd by focusing on per-job match report, but does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 availability constraints (roles=candidate; candidate_platforms=zhipin; recruiter_platforms=-), which implies when the tool can be used. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose it over alternatives like boss_ai_analyze_jd or boss_ai_optimize, nor does it provide exclusions beyond availability.

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