Resume as markdown

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states 'Nothing is written to disk' and 'Free', and clarifies that it applies page-budget trimming. This gives an agent a solid sense of the tool's side effects and behavior, though it does not detail output format nuances beyond 'markdown text inline.'

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and output format. No redundant filler. The additional behavioral notes ('Nothing is written to disk. Free.') are brief and earned.

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 is simple enough that a basic call with defaults is adequately supported. However, with three undocumented optional parameters and no output schema, the description is not complete: variant and target_role are unexplained, and the exact return value is only described at a high level as inline markdown.

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 compensate for the three unstructured parameters. It only vaguely connects max_pages to 'same page-budget trimming as resume_create' and does not explain what variant or target_role mean or how they affect output. An agent cannot make informed choices for those parameters from this description alone.

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 action ('Return the stored profile'), the resource, and the format ('markdown text inline'). It also gives the intended use, which lets an agent distinguish it from siblings like resume_to_html and resume_read without opening their schemas.

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 gives concrete usage context: 'ready to paste into a form or an ATS box.' It also references resume_create for max_pages behavior, which gives a useful cross-tool anchor, though it does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool in favor of resume_to_html.

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