update_candidate_status

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

The description implies a state change ('move') but does not disclose any behavioral traits like side effects, permissions needed, idempotency, or result format. Without annotations, this is insufficient.

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 a single, efficient sentence that covers the core purpose without any wasted words.

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?

While the output schema exists (not shown), the description omits important context like error conditions, case sensitivity, and differentiation from similar tools. It is minimally adequate but incomplete.

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?

The description adds meaning to the 'status' parameter by listing example stages, but the 'candidate_id' parameter is left unexplained. With 0% schema coverage, the description partially compensates but needs more detail.

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 ('move a candidate to a new stage') and provides concrete examples of stages, making the tool's purpose understandable. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling 'move_candidate_in_pipeline', which may cause confusion.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus its alternatives, such as 'move_candidate_in_pipeline'. The description lacks context on prerequisites or preferred use cases.

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