im_get_matching_report

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

No annotations provided, and description omits behavioral details like side effects, auth requirements, error handling, or idempotency. While 'Generate' implies read-only, this is not explicitly stated.

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?

Single sentence under 20 words, front-loaded with key action and resource. No unnecessary words. Could be considered slightly terse but achieves conciseness.

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?

Description lists report contents (matches, scores, placement rates, job families), offering moderate completeness. No output schema or error condition information, which is a gap given the lack of annotations.

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 covers all three parameters with descriptions for from_date and to_date. Description adds 'date range' context but does not explain the optional 'department' parameter. Schema coverage is 100%, so description adds minimal value.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Generate' and resource 'IntelliMatch summary report', listing included metrics. Distinguishes from sibling tools like im_get_placement_metrics and im_get_match_score by describing a combined summary report. However, no explicit differentiation in usage context.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as im_get_placement_metrics or im_get_match_score. Does not specify prerequisites or appropriate use cases.

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