boss_shortlist_add

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the positive action—adding to a local pool with optional tags and notes—but does not disclose duplicate handling, overwrite behavior, persistence side effects, or required permissions, which are important for a mutation 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 core instruction is one short, clear sentence, and the availability suffix adds useful constraints. The duplicated '可用性: 可用性:' typo and awkward bracketing prevent a perfect score.

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?

The schema covers all parameters and the description explains the basic operation and availability, but for a mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, it omits important runtime behavior such as duplicate handling, success/error response, and idempotency.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description only restates tags and notes as local labels/remarks and adds no further meaning about the security_id/job_id relationship or value constraints, keeping it at the baseline.

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 has a specific verb '加入' (add), a clear object '职位' (job), and a destination '本地候选池' (local candidate pool), along with optional tags and remarks. This distinguishes it well from shortlist list, compare, annotate, and remove siblings.

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 the tool to candidate roles on zhilian and zhipin platforms and excludes recruiter platforms, giving clear when/when-not context. It does not name sibling alternatives such as boss_shortlist_annotate for existing entries, so it falls short of a 5.

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