boss_resume_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well by disclosing the output contents and the availability constraints (roles and platforms). It does not mention pagination or ordering, but for a simple read-only list operation this is a minor gap.

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, front-loaded, and free of filler, with the availability context cleanly bracketed at the end. The duplicate '可用性:' inside the availability metadata is a minor typo that keeps it from being perfect.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description supplies the essential information: what is listed, which fields are returned, and the availability constraints. It is adequate, though it could further clarify whether results are sorted or paginated.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There are no parameter semantics to clarify beyond what the empty input schema already shows.

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 ('列出' / list) with a clear resource ('所有本地简历' / all local resumes) and specifies the returned fields: name, creation time, and associated job count. This clearly distinguishes it from related siblings like boss_resume_show, which targets an individual resume.

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 implies usage for obtaining an overview of local resumes, and the availability metadata states it applies to candidate roles on zhilian and zhipin platforms. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as boss_resume_show or boss_hr_resume.

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