linkedin_update_current_position

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the mutation ('Atualiza') but does not disclose whether this overwrites an existing current position, requires any permissions, or returns anything. The behavior is ambiguous, especially regarding its relationship to linkedin_add_experience.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. There is zero wasted text, and it conveys the essential purpose and parameters in a compact form.

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?

The tool is simple with only 3 string parameters, but the lack of annotations and output schema means the description must clarify whether it replaces or creates a current position. It fails to do so, leaving critical ambiguity that could lead to misuse. The description is minimal but not sufficient for safe 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with each parameter already documented in the schema (title, company, description). The description repeats these fields but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Atualiza o cargo atual' (updates the current position) and lists the fields (title, company, description). This distinguishes it from siblings like linkedin_update_about and linkedin_update_headline, but it does not explicitly contrast with linkedin_add_experience, which could also involve positions.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this updates/replaces an existing current position, nor does it suggest using linkedin_add_experience for adding a new position. The user must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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