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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint=false, destructiveHint=false), it discloses that the whole team is returned at once with no search or paging, that callers must filter rows themselves, that removed people are absent, and that other tools source userId here. This is rich operational context an agent cannot get from annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and the alternative, and each sentence carries useful information (return scope, no paging, exclusions, userId source). The example-question list is slightly padded but still aids routing.

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?

With no input or output schema, the description carries the full burden and does so: it explains what is returned, that it is unpaginated, what is excluded, and how the result feeds other tools.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly does not invent parameter semantics; there is nothing to document.

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 resource (everyone who works for the merchant) with a concrete UI path and example queries ('who works here', 'what role does Maria have'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling get_employee_sales, so an agent can route without opening either schema.

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?

Gives both when-to-use (who works here, roles, permissions) and when-not (for sales figures use get_employee_sales instead). The condition selecting the alternative is stated explicitly.

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