add_education

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool adds an entry, implying a write operation, but doesn't cover permissions, side effects, error handling, or response format. The mention of 'works with modern template' adds some context but is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a structured parameter list. Each sentence earns its place by clarifying parameters, though the 'works with modern template' clause could be more integrated. Overall efficient with minimal waste.

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 a mutation tool with no annotations, 6 parameters, and an output schema (which reduces need to describe returns), the description is moderately complete. It covers parameter semantics well but lacks behavioral details like error conditions or template compatibility specifics, leaving gaps for safe usage.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides meaningful explanations for all parameters (e.g., 'School/University name' for institution, 'Degree and major' for degree), including optionality notes for location and details. This adds substantial value beyond the bare schema.

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 action ('Add a new education entry') and target resource ('to a resume'), with specific context about working with modern templates. It distinguishes from siblings like 'add_experience' by focusing on education rather than work experience, though it doesn't explicitly contrast them.

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 implies usage when adding education to a resume, particularly with modern templates, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like 'edit_resume' or 'create_resume' for similar modifications. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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