boss_status

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. 'Check login status' implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly state side-effect-free behavior, whether it refreshes tokens, or what happens when the user is not logged in.

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 short and front-loads the purpose, followed by relevant availability metadata. The duplicated '可用性: 可用性:' is a minor formatting blemish but does not harm comprehension.

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 status check, the description is mostly complete and includes availability context. However, there is no output schema and no description of the returned status value, leaving a small gap for agents expecting a specific response shape.

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 input schema is empty with zero parameters, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description is not required to compensate for parameter coverage gaps.

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: '检查 BOSS 直聘登录态' (check BOSS Zhipin login status). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like boss_crawl_status and boss_me.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor what to do based on the result. The bracketed availability block lists roles and platforms but does not explain usage conditions or exclusions.

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