list_work_experiences

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

No annotations are present, so the description must provide behavioral context. It does not disclose pagination, ordering, default scope (e.g., user-specific or global), or whether it returns full objects or summaries. The output schema exists, but the description adds no behavioral insight beyond the obvious.

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, clear sentence that conveys the essential purpose and filters without extraneous words. It is efficiently structured.

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 presence of an output schema, return values are covered. However, the description lacks details on ordering, default behavior when no resume_id is provided, or whether the list is restricted to the current user. This leaves gaps for an agent to fully understand the tool's scope.

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 100% - both parameters have descriptions in the input schema. The tool description reiterates the filter options but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema. 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 verb 'List' and the resource 'work experiences', and specifies optional filters (by resume_id and current_only). It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_work_experiences by focusing on listing rather than searching.

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 explicitly mentions optional filters for resume and current roles, guiding when to use those parameters. However, it does not compare this tool to the sibling search tool (search_work_experiences) or indicate when listing vs searching is appropriate.

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