boss_shortlist_remove

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the removal action and adds no information about side effects, irreversibility, or return behavior. This leaves the agent to infer that removal is immediate and permanent without evidence.

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 sentence is concise and front-loaded, but the embedded availability string contains a duplicated '可用性: 可用性:' and is noisy metadata that does not aid the agent in understanding the tool's behavior. The description is under-specified rather than efficiently concise.

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 simple two-parameter removal tool, the operation and required params are adequately identified. However, with no output schema and no mention of what happens after removal (e.g., confirmation, errors, reversibility), there are minor gaps that keep this from being fully 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 schema already describes both parameters ('加密职位 ID' and '职位安全 ID') with 100% coverage, so the description need not repeat them. The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond the schema fields, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 '从候选池移除职位' states a specific action (remove) and resource (job from candidate pool), clearly conveying the tool's function. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like boss_shortlist_add or boss_shortlist_list, which keeps it at a 4.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as boss_shortlist_add or boss_shortlist_list. The availability tag gives role/platform constraints (roles=candidate; candidate_platforms=zhilian, zhipin), but this is configuration metadata rather than usage guidance.

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