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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying exactly which fields are returned and which sensitive fields are deliberately excluded.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by the important field exclusions and a concise filtering example. No wasted words, and the endpoint notation is compact.

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 output schema, the description compensates by listing the returned fields and explicitly stating what is excluded. Pagination is fully covered by the schema parameters, and the annotations cover the safety profile, so an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 100%, so all five parameters are already well documented in the schema. The description only repeats an OData filter example that is already present in the filter parameter description, adding no new parameter semantics.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List the business's employees') and enumerates the basic details returned. It also distinguishes this list from the full employee record by excluding tax file, bank, and super details, which implicitly separates it from keypay_get_employee.

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 gives clear usage context for filtering with OData and notes the endpoint, and the exclusions imply when this tool is not appropriate. However, it never explicitly names the alternative tool for full details, so the when-to-use guidance is strong but not complete.

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