get_employee_on_date

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds no further behavioral context, such as what happens when no employee exists on the given date, whether historical data is returned, or any limitations. It simply restates the read-only nature already indicated by 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?

The description is a single sentence with no unnecessary words or repetition. It is efficient and front-loaded, though it could benefit from a slightly clearer phrasing to convey the historical-state nuance.

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?

The tool is simple with only two well-documented parameters and strong annotations covering safety. However, the description lacks an explicit statement about returning the employee state as of the date, and there is no output schema, so an agent might not fully understand the result semantics. The schema's date description partially compensates.

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%, with both parameters described ('Id of an employee' and 'Date of employee's state'). The tool description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema, but because the schema already provides adequate descriptions, the baseline of 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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('a single employee') with a qualifier ('on a specific date'), which clearly distinguishes it from generic employee tools like get_employee. However, it does not explicitly explain that the date represents the employee's state as of that date, which is a key nuance.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_employee or list_employees. The description neither mentions prerequisites nor excludes cases where another tool would be more appropriate.

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