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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds non-obvious behavior the agent cannot see elsewhere: the API returns every employee in a single reply, so paging is client-side rather than server-enforced. It also proactively states that sensitive fields (national id, passport, bank account) are never included, which prevents an agent from promising data that will not appear.

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 tight sentences: what is returned, how to page/refine, where to go for the full record. The most decision-relevant facts (summary-only, full-reply behavior) are front-loaded with zero filler.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description enumerates the returned fields and the excluded sensitive ones, and it explains the pagination model. For a 4-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage, nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so limit/offset/search/status are already fully documented, including the enum meanings and the next_offset convention. The description still adds value by pairing the parameters with intent (search to narrow, limit/offset to page) rather than restating types.

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?

Specific verb + resource ("List the company's employees") plus the exact returned fields in the same sentence, so an agent knows precisely what comes back without opening a schema. It is clearly differentiated from talenox_get_employee, which is named explicitly.

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 explicit routing: use this for the short summary, use talenox_get_employee for the full record, use search to narrow, use limit/offset to page. The condition that selects each sibling is stated, not inferred.

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