hcm_get_public_worker

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares the operation is read-only, and the description adds no additional behavioral details such as response format, error handling, or permission requirements. The description carries minimal burden beyond what annotations already provide, offering no extra transparency.

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 extremely concise—one sentence with no waste. However, it is under-specified to the point of being terse rather than effectively structured. It front-loads the key action but lacks supporting context that could be included without bloat.

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 tool with a single parameter and read-only annotation, the description is minimal. It does not explain what a 'publicWorker' is, what data is returned, or how it differs from a regular worker. Given the large sibling list with similar get/search tools, this lack of context makes it incomplete for an agent to correctly choose and use it.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description must compensate. It only mentions 'by id', which merely restates the parameter name 'publicWorkerId'. No format, constraints, or meaning beyond the name is given, offering negligible value over the schema.

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 'Get' and the resource 'publicWorker' identified by id. It is specific enough to know it retrieves a single public worker by ID, but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like hcm_get_worker or hcm_search_public_workers, which weakens clarity slightly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as hcm_search_public_workers (when ID is unknown) or hcm_get_worker (for full worker data). No context on prerequisites, exclusions, or conditions for selection is provided.

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