create_recruiting_applicant

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

The description discloses key behaviors beyond annotations: duplicate rejection, APP sequence increment, status resolution from vacancy workflow, and recruit-enabling. Annotations only provide title and hints (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), so the description adds valuable context about side effects and constraints.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose, second lists effects. Front-loaded with the main action. No unnecessary words, though could be slightly more structured with bullet points for 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?

For a creation tool with 6 parameters (2 required) and an output schema, the description covers core behavior and side effects. However, it omits guidance on optional parameters and error handling. Given schema coverage is low, the description could be more complete to aid tool 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 coverage is low (33%), only documenting candidate and status trimming. The description clarifies that vacancy and candidate are linked and that status is resolved from the vacancy workflow, but does not elaborate on optional parameters (assignee, startDate, dueDate) beyond the 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 verb 'Create' and the resource 'applicant linking one vacancy and candidate'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like update_recruiting_applicant by specifying the exact linkage and behavior (rejects duplicates, increments APP sequence, resolves status).

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_recruiting_applicant or update_recruiting_applicant. It implies usage for creating new applicant records but lacks 'when-not-to-use' guidance or alternative recommendations.

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