boss_shortlist_add

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the action without disclosing side effects, authentication needs, or duplicate handling. Minimal behavioral information.

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 very short and to the point, with no superfluous text. However, there is a minor duplication ('可用性: 可用性:') that slightly mars clarity.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (2 params, no output schema), the description lacks context on effects (e.g., adding to list, error conditions, result). It is not fully complete for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 descriptions cover both parameters (security_id and job_id), so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, but the schema itself is sufficient.

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 'Add position to candidate pool', clearly indicating the action and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like boss_shortlist_remove or boss_watch_add, though the name itself helps.

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 availability constraints: roles=candidate, candidate_platforms=zhilian, zhipin, and recruiter_platforms=-, giving explicit context on when to use this tool. It does not specify when not to use or alternative tools, but the guidance is helpful.

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