boss_shortlist_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only says '查看' (view), implying a read operation, but it does not disclose output format, pagination, authentication requirements, or any potential side effects. The garbled availability suffix adds little behavioral clarity.

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 description is one concise phrase and the meaning is front-loaded. However, there is a duplicated '可用性: 可用性:' typo in the availability suffix, which is minor noise but prevents 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?

For a zero-parameter list tool, this is minimally adequate, but with no output schema and no annotations, the agent is not told what the returned data will look like or whether any filtering or pagination behavior exists. The description explains the subject of the listing but not the call's full contract.

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 and the schema coverage is 100%, so the description needs no parameter explanations. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and the description does not introduce any parameter-related confusion.

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 a specific verb and resource: '查看候选池中的所有职位' (view all positions in the candidate pool). This clearly differentiates it from sibling shortlist tools like add, remove, annotate, and compare, which all perform different actions on the same resource.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as boss_shortlist_compare, boss_resume_list, or boss_watch_list. The availability note about roles and platforms is context, not usage direction, and there are no exclusions or preferred conditions stated.

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