boss_preset_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. '列出' (list) implies a non-mutating read, and the availability block usefully discloses role/platform gating (candidate role, zhipin platform), which is real behavioral context. It still says nothing about ordering, pagination, or what happens when no presets exist.

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 compact sentence with the verb+resource front-loaded, followed by the availability qualifier. Minor flaw: the label '可用性:' is duplicated ('可用性: 可用性:'), a small copy-editing defect that wastes a few characters.

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 no parameters, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description is nearly sufficient for what an agent needs to invoke it. The availability constraint covers the main risk (wrong role/platform), though return shape is left entirely unspecified.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so per the rubric baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to clarify about inputs, and it correctly presents this as an unfiltered list.

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 states a clear verb+resource: '列出所有搜索预设' (list all search presets), which an agent can distinguish from preset mutation siblings like boss_preset_add / boss_preset_remove. It does not explicitly name those siblings or contrast scope, so it stops short of a 5.

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 bracketed availability block gives an implicit condition for use (roles=candidate, candidate_platforms=zhipin, recruiter_platforms=-), so the agent can infer when the tool is applicable. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs. alternative guidance against the preset_add/remove siblings or any other preset source.

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