boss_hr_candidates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It only says 'search candidates' and lists availability constraints; it does not disclose return format, pagination behavior, side effects, or whether any state changes occur.

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 short and front-loads the main purpose, but it contains a duplicated token ('可用性: 可用性:') and combines availability metadata awkwardly in brackets. It is concise but not polished.

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?

With 12 optional parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and a large sibling list, the description does not provide enough context. It lacks guidance on defaults, expected results, or how this search differs from other search-related tools.

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 all 12 parameters are already documented with meaningful descriptions in the input schema. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 a specific verb and resource: '搜索候选人' (search candidates) within '招聘者模式' (recruiter mode). It is easy to tell this is a recruiter-scoped candidate search tool, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools for differentiation.

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 gives availability context ('roles=recruiter; ... recruiter_platforms=zhipin-recruiter'), implying this is for recruiters on a specific platform. However, it provides no guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings like boss_search, boss_recommend, or boss_hr_applications.

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