add_resume

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It does not mention potential overwrites, required prerequisites (e.g., profile existence), side effects, or error conditions. The description is too sparse to inform safe invocation.

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 two sentences with no redundant information. It front-loads the core action and then adds a brief justification for the role_types parameter. Every word earns its place.

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 absence of an output schema, the description should clarify what the tool returns (e.g., success status, created variant). It also fails to explain the mutual exclusivity of 'path' and 'text' parameters (though the schema notes it). A creation tool requires richer context.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema—it mentions 'each variant targets specific role types,' but the schema already describes role_types. No further parameter context is provided.

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's function: 'Add a new resume variant to the profile.' It also explains the purpose of variants ('target specific role types for automatic selection during fit analysis'), distinguishing it from other resume-related tools like get_resume (view) and list_resumes (list).

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., updating an existing variant or using list_resumes to view variants). No conditions or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage.

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