List Employee Anniversaries

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait (only active, non-terminated employees are included) and mentions forecasting behavior. However, it does not describe return structure, pagination, or potential side-effects, though the schema's max_records mention helps for the limit aspect.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action in the first sentence, followed by a concise mention of filtering and forecasting. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Given no output schema, the description offers a hint about return content ('with years worked'). It covers the tool's main purpose and key filtering dimensions (month range, forecasting). It does not enumerate all filter parameters, but the input schema compensates. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for a filtered list tool.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides; it merely summarizes month range and selected_year. It does not clarify any additional semantics or edge cases.

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 tool gets upcoming employee work anniversaries for active, non-terminated employees, with years worked. It uses a specific verb and resource, and the active/non-terminated scope distinguishes it from more general tools like list_employees or list_birthdays.

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?

The description provides clear usage context: it is for retrieving work anniversaries with month-range filtering and optional future-year forecasting. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the scope is unmistakable and well-aligned with the tool's purpose.

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