boss_show

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. '查看' implies a read-only lookup, but the description does not say whether viewing marks the job as seen, what is returned, or whether the number stays valid after a new search replaces the result set. The availability line adds some useful context on eligibility, but the behavior profile is still thin.

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?

It is one front-loaded sentence plus a compact bracketed availability tag, with no redundant restatement of the name or title. An agent can scan it instantly.

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 one-parameter read tool there is no output schema, so the description must indicate what comes back; '职位详情' is only a vague signal of the returned payload. The provenance rule for the number is covered, but nothing addresses staleness of the cached result set or what happens when the number is out of range.

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%: the single 'number' parameter is already documented as '职位编号（从搜索结果中获取）'. The description restates that the number comes from the last search or recommendation results, which slightly reinforces the schema but adds no syntax, range, or validation detail. A baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb and resource phrase ('按编号快速查看…职位详情'), so it is clear that this is a lookup-by-number view tool. It also narrows the scope by saying the number is drawn from the last search or recommendation results. However, it never names the close sibling boss_detail, so an agent must infer on its own why it should use this tool instead of the general detail tool.

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 bracket lists availability constraints (roles=candidate; candidate_platforms=zhipin; recruiter_platforms=-), which amounts to an implied precondition for when to call this tool. But there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or on the distinction from boss_detail or boss_resume_show, so the guidance is only partial.

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