boss_favorites_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It usefully discloses that the operation does not persist ('不落库'), signaling a read-only preview with no side effects, and it scopes the read to a single page. It stops short of describing pagination behavior, return contents, or any rate/auth constraints.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence stating the operation, scope, and non-persistence caveat. Minor defect: the duplicated '可用性: 可用性:' token, otherwise no wasted text.

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 one-parameter list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essentials – what it lists, the page scope, and the no-persistence caveat. It is still thin on return shape and how paging interacts with available results, leaving some inference to the 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 description coverage is 100% – the single 'page' parameter is documented as 页码 in the schema. The description's '单页' (single page) phrasing reinforces pagination but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (预览/preview) and resource (BOSS 职位收藏单页 – BOSS job favorites, single page) plus the extra scope of 有效状态 (validity status). An agent can tell this is a paginated favorites-listing tool. It does not, however, name or distinguish itself from near-neighbors such as boss_shortlist_list or boss_preset_list.

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 availability tag declares the intended audience and platform (roles=candidate; candidate_platforms=zhipin; recruiter_platforms=-), which tells an agent when the tool applies. However, there is no guidance on when to prefer this over similar list tools, nor any stated prerequisites or exclusions beyond the role/platform filter.

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