list_resumes

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates this is a read-only list operation and adds important behavioral nuance by noting that the default resume is marked. It does not disclose any side effects or additional behavior, but the simplicity of the tool and the verb 'List' imply safety.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the main action, and adds only the relevant extra detail about default marking. 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 zero parameters and the presence of an output schema (which covers return shape), the description is sufficient. It explains the core purpose and the distinctive default-marking behavior, making it complete for this simple list operation.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to elaborate on parameter semantics, and any parameter information would be redundant since none exist.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'stored resumes', and clarifies a unique behavior ('marking which one is used when none is named'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tailored_resumes and get_resume.

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 implies usage when you need to see all stored resumes, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like list_tailored_resumes or get_resume. No exclusions or alternative tool names are mentioned, leaving the guidance implicit.

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