boss_resume_list

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

With no annotations, the description still conveys a read-only listing operation, its exhaustive local scope, and the metadata included for each resume. It does not clarify ordering, empty-result behavior, or where local resumes are stored, but these are secondary for a simple listing 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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the operation, scope, and returned fields. The bracketed availability metadata adds useful constraints without unnecessary prose.

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-argument list operation, the description provides enough information to invoke it correctly and understand its basic result despite the absence of an output schema. Explicit routing to boss_resume_show and minor result-behavior details would make it more 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?

The tool has no parameters, so there is no parameter meaning for the description to supply. Its lack of filtering or pagination inputs is consistent with the stated scope of listing all local resumes.

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 the action and resource: listing all local resumes, with name, creation time, and associated-job count. The local, all-resume scope helps distinguish it from detail and recruiter-oriented resume siblings, though no sibling is explicitly named.

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 availability metadata explicitly limits use to candidate roles on the zhipin candidate platform and excludes recruiter platforms. It does not explain when to use boss_resume_show instead for an individual resume's details.

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