list_recruiting_applicants

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds context about accepted filter formats (e.g., vacancy accepts IDs/numbers/names) but does not disclose pagination behavior, default limit, or ordering. It does not contradict 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?

Two sentences effectively convey the tool's purpose and filter details. The second sentence is slightly dense but packs valuable input format information. Could benefit from front-loading the primary action.

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 covers the core list functionality and filter options. However, it omits pagination details (default limit, max results) and does not explain the return structure or use cases. Adequate but not fully rounded.

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 description adds significant meaning beyond the schema: for the 'vacancy' parameter (which lacks a schema description), it explains accepted formats; for 'candidate', it clarifies accepted identifiers. With 75% schema description coverage, the description compensates well for 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 clearly states 'List Recruiting applicants' and specifies optional filters by vacancy, candidate, and status. It is distinguishable from siblings like 'list_recruiting_candidates' (which lists people) and 'list_recruiting_vacancies' (which lists job openings), though it could more explicitly define 'applicant' as an application to a vacancy.

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 provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'get_recruiting_applicant' for a single applicant, or 'list_recruiting_applicant_matches' for matches). No mention of when not to use it or prerequisites.

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