View Work Experience

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

The description adds behavior beyond annotations by stating that each entry returns its ID for update/delete and recommending post-fetch analysis. Annotations already mark it as read-only, so no contradiction.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core function, and each sentence adds value without redundancy. It efficiently conveys purpose and usage guidance.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and post-fetch actions. It could benefit from mentioning typical return fields (e.g., title, dates) but is adequate for an agent to use effectively.

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?

There are no parameters, so the input schema provides no information. The description compensates by explaining the tool's output (IDs) and how to use the data. This meets the baseline for no parameters.

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 retrieves the user's work experience/job history and each entry returns an ID for update/delete. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_work_experience or delete_work_experience.

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 advises using this tool to ground statements about the user's background and suggests post-fetch actions like flagging duplicates. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives like get_profile.

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