get_highlights

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

No annotations provided, but the description indicates a read operation returning aggregated metrics. It does not disclose potential side effects, permissions, or data freshness, but for a simple parameterless retrieval, it is moderately transparent.

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 that is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words. Every part contributes to understanding the tool's output.

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 no output schema, the description gives examples of returned metrics but does not specify structure or all possible keys. This is adequate for a simple tool but not fully complete.

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?

No parameters exist (schema coverage 100%), so the description does not need to add param info. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description adds value by explaining what the tool returns.

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 returns headline career metrics with examples (years, latency cut, revenue lift). It distinguishes from sibling tools that return detailed sections like get_experience or get_profile, though it does not explicitly contrast them.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_experience or get_resume. The usage context is only implied by the description of the output.

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