Add Resume Note

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It explains the purpose and that notes accumulate (implying an append-like behavior), but does not mention persistence, permissions, or side effects. It adds some behavioral context beyond a bare 'add note' but lacks details about mutation or storage.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and uses a short illustrative list. Every sentence contributes meaning without redundancy.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the core use case and intent. It could be stronger on explicit exclusions or storage behavior, but overall it is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly in most situations.

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%, so the parameter descriptions in the schema already define 'kind' and 'note'. The description adds examples that map to kind values and clarifies that notes are for future resume bullets, which offers moderate extra context without replacing schema documentation.

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 clear verb ('capture') and resource ('something that happened since the CV was last written'), and distinguishes it from siblings by focusing on accumulation for later CV refresh, not on direct interaction logging or outreach.

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?

It clearly implies when to use: whenever there is a new achievement or event worth noting for a future CV update. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives like log_interaction or save_resume, but the context makes the intended use clear.

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