boss_mark

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses role/platform availability (roles=candidate, candidate_platforms=zhipin), which is useful, but says nothing about permissions, reversibility, or effects of removing a tag on a mutation tool.

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 sentence with a bracketed availability note, front-loaded with the core action. No wasted prose, though the doubled '可用性: 可用性:' is a small defect.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the action and audience constraint but omits return behavior and the consequence of tagging/removing. Adequate but incomplete.

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 all three parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds only the tag examples (新招呼/沟通中/已约面/不合适/收藏), which is marginal added value. 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 pair (add/remove) and resource (tags on a contact), with concrete examples of tag values. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not distinguish itself from siblings like boss_shortlist_annotate or boss_favorites_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?

No guidance on when to tag vs. use a related tool such as shortlist annotate. The tag examples hint at intent but there is no when-to-use or exclusion guidance.

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