Duplicate Base Resume

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so safety is partly covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say whether the copy is deep or shallow, whether source content is left untouched, or what happens if new_slug already exists (annotations mark idempotentHint=false, so a collision error is plausible but unstated).

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?

A single short sentence with the verb and target front-loaded and no wasted words. It is concise, though the brevity comes partly from under-specification rather than disciplined editing.

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 mutation tool with three undocumented parameters, no output schema, and only a default-valued third argument, the description omits too much: no mention of the third parameter, no collision behavior, and no indication of what the new resume inherits. An agent could call it, but with avoidable guesswork.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load, but it only gestures at two of the three parameters ('existing' slug and 'new slug'). The optional new_display_name is never mentioned, nor is uniqueness/format expected for new_slug or the default display name of the clone.

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?

States a specific verb ('Clone') and resource ('base resume') plus the outcome ('into a new slug'), so an agent knows this is a copy operation. It does not, however, distinguish itself from close siblings like create_base_resume, create_base_resume_from_kb, or kb_sync_base, which could also produce a new resume.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of the alternatives that produce a new base resume (create_base_resume, create_base_resume_from_kb, kb_sync_base). The agent must infer that this tool is for copying an existing resume rather than building one from knowledge-base data.

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