boss_shortlist_annotate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. 'Update' implies mutation, but there is no mention of side effects, permissions, rate limits, reversibility, or whether changes are local vs server-side. This is insufficient transparency 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 description is a single sentence plus availability info in brackets. It is concise but lacks structural elements like sections or bullet points. For a simple tool, this is efficient without waste.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should cover return values, error conditions, and prerequisites. It only states the purpose and availability constraints, missing important context for a mutation operation. Schema covers parameters but behavioral completeness is lacking.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter having a brief description (e.g., '替换本地备注' for note). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 '更新本地候选池职位的标签和备注' (update tags and notes for local candidate pool positions) clearly states the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like boss_shortlist_add, boss_shortlist_remove, and boss_shortlist_list which serve different purposes.

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, platforms=zhilian/zhipin) which provide context on when this tool can be used. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it relative to other shortlist tools. The implicit purpose is clear enough for an agent.

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