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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that the tool returns public profile info and the agency to contact, and that hiring is not directly handled by the tool but through the worker's licensed agency. This adds meaningful context, even though details like result ordering or empty-result behavior are absent.

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 composed of three tight sentences that efficiently convey scope, roles, filter options, return value, and a key workflow caveat. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no fluff or repetition.

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 simple browse tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the input filters, the return content (public profile info and agency), and the hiring constraint. It could explicitly state that results are a list, but overall it provides enough context for correct invocation and subsequent actions.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for all three parameters, covering 100% of them. The description merely restates that filtering is by nationality and/or position, adding no deeper semantic meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb ('Browse') and resource ('domestic workers currently listed as available through licensed GCC agencies'), enumerates specific roles, and explains the filtering criteria and return content. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_agencies, which target agencies rather than workers.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use the tool: to browse available domestic workers with optional nationality/position filters. It also explains the follow-up process ('hiring always goes through the worker's licensed agency'). However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use this tool.

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