查看求职者画像

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It conveys only that the read targets the 'currently saved' profile; it says nothing about behavior when no profile has been saved, permissions, or what form the data takes. Minimal for a getter with zero annotation coverage.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, and the resource being read leads the statement. Nothing is padded, though it is arguably so terse that it forgoes the chance to add any of the missing context.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is the only source of information, and it does not describe what the returned profile contains or how it differs from resume data. For a simple no-argument getter this is borderline adequate, but the agent gets no picture of the response.

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 takes no parameters, so there are no semantics to document — baseline 4 applies. Schema coverage is 100% and the description correctly implies no input is needed.

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 (读取) and resource (求职者画像), and '当前保存的' scopes it to the persisted profile rather than any transient state. It implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling profile_save, though it never names it.

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?

There is no statement of when to call this versus alternatives such as profile_save, resume_get, or resume_load, and no mention of prerequisites (e.g. whether a profile must already exist). For a zero-parameter getter the usage is somewhat inferable, but the description gives no explicit guidance.

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