tailor_resume

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention any side effects, access requirements, or transformation behavior beyond the generic 'generate' verb. There is no discussion of how the resume is tailored or whether the operation modifies stored data, making it insufficiently 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?

The description is concise and well-structured, with a one-sentence purpose followed by a bulleted argument list. Every word contributes, and the format is easy for an agent 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?

The description covers the core purpose and parameters, and an output schema exists to explain return values. However, it omits broader contextual details such as prerequisites, integration with other tools like list_templates, and any limitations of the tailoring process, leaving some gaps for an agent operating in a complex workflow.

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 Args section supplements the schema by explaining the meaning of each parameter, such as 'profile_id: LinkedIn profile ID or ''me'' for self' and providing valid options for template and output_format (html, md, pdf). This adds semantic value beyond the bare schema, which has no descriptions.

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 begins with 'Generate a resume tailored to a specific job posting,' which clearly identifies the action (generate) and the object (resume) with a distinguishing scope (tailored to a job posting). This differentiates it from sibling tools like generate_resume and generate_cover_letter.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use tailor_resume versus other resume-related tools. It neither mentions specific use cases nor explicitly excludes alternatives. The only clue is the phrase 'tailored to a specific job posting,' but no explicit comparison or context is given.

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