boss_me

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It clearly states a read-only operation (获取信息) with no mention of side effects, deletions, or modifications. The constraints on roles and platforms are additional transparency about availability.

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 a single sentence that states the main purpose upfront, followed by a brief availability note. Every part is necessary and no redundant information.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists the four sections (info, resume, expect, deliver), giving the agent a clear idea of what data will be returned. The constraints on roles and platforms are also included, making the tool's context complete.

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 parameter 'section' has an enum and a description '指定查看的部分' (specify which part to view). The tool description does not add new parameter information beyond what the schema already provides, so 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?

The description uses a specific verb '获取' (get) and resource '当前登录用户信息' (current logged-in user info), listing the sections (基本信息、简历、求职期望、投递记录). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like boss_show (shows others) and boss_resume_list (lists all resumes) by focusing on the current user.

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 includes an availability constraint: only for candidates on specific platforms (qiancheng, zhilian, zhipin) and not for recruiters. This tells when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools for recruiters.

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