unarchive_recruiting_vacancy

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. Description adds acceptable identifier formats but does not disclose side effects (e.g., if vacancy not found or already unarchived). No contradiction 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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with purpose, no unnecessary words. Every part is essential.

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?

Sufficient for a simple unarchive action, especially with output schema available. Covers what the tool does and input formats. Lacks mention of prerequisites (e.g., vacancy must be archived) but still adequate.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds significant value by detailing acceptable parameter formats (raw _id, VCN-<number>, bare number, exact name), which goes beyond the schema's plain string type.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'unarchive' and resource 'Recruiting vacancy', and specifies acceptable identifier formats (raw _id, VCN-<number>, bare number, exact name). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'archive_recruiting_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?

Implies usage for unarchiving vacancies but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use. Provides no alternatives or prerequisites, though sibling context suggests the opposite action.

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