get_recruiting_applicant

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds the ability to query by multiple identifier types and disambiguation needs. It doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits but is consistent with annotations.

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 a single sentence that conveys all essential information concisely. It could be slightly better structured with bullet points, but it has no filler and is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 the presence of an output schema, the description appropriately focuses on input semantics and disambiguation. It covers the three parameter use cases and provides enough context for parameter usage without overloading.

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 low (33%). The description compensates by explaining that 'applicant' can be an _id, APP-<number>, or number, and clarifies when to use 'vacancy' and 'candidate' for disambiguation. However, it doesn't specify formats or constraints for these optional parameters.

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 retrieves a single recruiting applicant using three identifier formats (raw _id, APP-<number>, bare number). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_recruiting_candidate and get_recruiting_vacancy by its specific focus on applicants.

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 gives explicit guidance on when to pass vacancy and/or candidate parameters (when the APP number could be ambiguous). While it doesn't list exclusions or alternatives, the context is clear enough for most use cases.

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