List Keka Job Candidates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the exact return payload (name, email, phone, interview stage, application date, source, status) and mentions pagination and format controls, giving the agent a clear picture of behavior beyond 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 purpose line is front-loaded, followed by a tight Args list and a brief Returns list. There is no filler; every sentence provides operational value, and the structure is easy to scan.

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?

With full schema documentation and annotations, the description fills the only missing gap—return values—by enumerating the candidate fields returned. It also supplies pagination defaults, output formats, and the source of jobId, making the tool callable without external lookups.

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 100%, so the schema already documents types, defaults, ranges, and the enum, making the baseline 3. The description adds one valuable semantic detail: jobId should come from keka_list_jobs, which helps an agent acquire a valid value rather than guessing.

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 states a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('candidates for a specific job opening in Keka Hire'), which clearly differentiates it from sibling list tools that target leave types, pay bands, employees, etc. The title and description align, and the scope is immediately understandable.

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 frames the tool as job-scoped and explicitly points to keka_list_jobs as the way to obtain a valid jobId, which is useful selection and prerequisite guidance. It does not explicitly list exclusions or alternative tools, but the context is clear enough for correct selection among the sibling list tools.

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