get_tailored_resume

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it only states a basic read operation. It does not indicate what happens if no tailored resume exists for the job, whether the tool can error, or any side effects. The description adds no context beyond the tool's name and schema.

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 a single, concise sentence with no filler words. Every word earns its place. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

For a simple one-parameter getter with an output schema, the description is minimally viable. It covers the core operation, but lacks edge-case behavior (e.g., 'not found' handling) and any context about the stored tailored resume relationship. Given the tool's simplicity, a score of 3 reflects adequate but not exceptional completeness.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage for job_id, so the description must compensate. It only says 'for a job', which weakly ties to the parameter but does not explain what job_id represents, its format, or how it is used. The agent can infer from the shell but receives no explicit semantic enrichment.

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 ('Return') and resource ('tailored resume') and qualifies the scope ('for a job'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tailored_resumes (which lists all) and get_resume (which likely fetches by resume ID). The connection to job_id is implied and confirmed by the schema.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this should be used when you need a single tailored resume for a specific job, nor does it exclude list_tailored_resumes for browsing multiple. There are no explicit exclusions or alternatives mentioned.

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