Resume as markdown

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly signals a read-only operation by saying 'Return the stored profile', which is the primary behavior. However, it does not describe how optional parameters affect the output or what the markdown contains, leaving behavioral details under-specified.

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 sentence that front-loads the core operation and then lists concrete use cases. Every word serves a purpose, with no redundant or vague phrasing. It is an example of concise, well-structured documentation.

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?

The tool has three optional parameters that are wholly undocumented, no output schema, and no annotations. The description explains only the general retrieval action but leaves critical context missing, such as how variant and target_role modify the output and what max_pages restricts. An agent would be uncertain how to make a tailored call.

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% and the description adds no information about any of the three parameters: variant, max_pages, or target_role. An agent would have to guess their meanings from names alone. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb, 'Return', and identifies the resource: 'the stored profile as markdown'. It also lists concrete use cases (form, email, ATS box), which helps distinguish it from the sibling resume_to_html. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: whenever markdown output is needed for pasting into forms, emails, or ATS systems. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusionary scenarios, but the use-case context makes the appropriate situation clear.

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