get_candidate_stage

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

Without annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It explains the internal reuse of another endpoint and clarifies the data source (stageName from candidate detail). It implies read-only behavior but does not explicitly state idempotence. The implementation insight is helpful.

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 with two sentences and a parameter bullet. It front-loads the purpose but includes implementation details that, while useful, extend beyond the core purpose. Still efficient overall.

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 the tool has an output schema, the description need not detail return values. It covers the parameter, implementation rationale, and data source. It is complete enough for an agent to use correctly, though lacks error handling or edge-case context.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description explicitly documents the parameter: 'application_id：候选人申请 ID。'. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type-only definition, compensating for the lack of schema description.

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 purpose: '查询候选人当前所处的招聘阶段' (query the candidate's current recruitment stage). It distinguishes from siblings like list_stages (lists all stages) and get_candidate_applications (lists applications) by specifying it returns the stage for a specific application.

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 querying a candidate's stage but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It mentions the implementation limitation but lacks direct comparison to siblings or conditions for alternative tools.

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