boss_batch_greet

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the batch cap of 10 and the availability gating, but says nothing about the fact that this sends real messages to real candidates, whether actions are reversible, or any auth/rate-limit behavior beyond the cap.

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?

Very short and front-loaded, with the core operation stated first and constraints bracketed after. One redundancy: the bracket repeats '可用性:' twice, a small structural blemish on an otherwise efficient line.

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?

For a bulk messaging tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin. It omits what actually happens on invocation (messages dispatched), what dry_run returns, and any prerequisite/auth context an agent needs before bulk-contacting candidates.

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 schema already documents all four parameters, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds one useful detail the schema lacks (the hard cap of 10, versus the schema's default limit of 5), but ignores dry_run and city.

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 and resource: batch greeting (批量打招呼) performed after a search, with a stated cap of 10. The batch framing distinguishes it reasonably from the single-target boss_greet, though it doesn't name the sibling explicitly.

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 '搜索后' (after searching) phrasing implies a workflow order, and the bracket gives role/platform availability constraints, but there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over boss_greet or boss_hr_greet. Usage must be inferred.

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