boss_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states only that the tool checks login status, with no disclosure of side effects, authentication needs, or state changes. The agent does not learn whether this tool requires prior login or if it is safe to call repeatedly.

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 but contains a typographical redundancy: '[可用性: 可用性:' repeats '可用性'. It could be more structured (e.g., using separate lines). Despite being brief, the repetition wastes space and reduces clarity.

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 that the tool has no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more context about the return value or behavior. It only says 'check login status' without indicating whether it returns a boolean, a JSON object, or how to interpret the result. For a simple status check, this is insufficiently 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 tool has no parameters (0 required, 0 optional), and the schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to explain parameters, but it adds platform availability context, which is helpful for invoking the tool correctly. Baseline score of 4 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 clearly states the tool checks login status (检查登录态) for BOSS直聘. It provides availability info (roles and platforms), distinguishing it from sibling tools like boss_search or boss_detail. However, it does not specify the exact output format or what 'login status' encompasses, so it loses a point for vagueness.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The availability info suggests applicable roles/platforms but does not tell users to use this before other tools or when to avoid it. There is no mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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