linkedin_add_education

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states that it adds a new education entry, without mentioning side effects, authentication requirements, overwriting behavior, or response format. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 that clearly and directly states the action, with no redundant or filler content. It is appropriately brief.

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?

Despite having 5 parameters and being a write operation with no annotations, the description only gives a one-line summary. It lacks details on expected behavior (e.g., whether it appends or replaces education), prerequisites, return values, or edge cases, making it incomplete for the tool's complexity.

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 schema provides descriptions for all 5 parameters (degree, school, endYear, startYear, fieldOfStudy), so the description adds no additional parameter semantics. The baseline score of 3 applies due to 100% schema coverage.

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 verb 'Adiciona' (adds) with a specific resource 'nova formação acadêmica' (new academic education) to the profile, which clearly states the function and distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_experience and add_skill.

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 for adding education but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like linkedin_add_experience or linkedin_update_about. No exclusions or alternative references are mentioned.

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