hibob_search_position_budgets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safe/read-only nature is established. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations by stating the rate limit ('100 requests/minute') and the pagination contract via 'has_more' and 'next_cursor'.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with purpose and use case, followed by compact Args, Returns, and Rate limit sections. It is slightly redundant with the schema's parameter descriptions, but overall every section earns its place and there is no fluff.

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 description covers the essential operational details: what the tool returns, pagination fields, parameter constraints, rate limits, and a representative use case. Given that an output schema is present and annotations cover safety, nothing critical is missing for an agent to call this tool 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 the schema already documents all parameters. The description mostly restates the schema, adding only minor practical details like 'None to start' for cursor and 'display labels' for include_human_readable, which does not significantly exceed the schema baseline.

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 opens with 'Search position budgets' and specifies 'planned salary and total cost per position,' making the tool's subject and scope immediately clear. It is clearly distinguishable from sibling search tools like hibob_search_positions and hibob_search_position_openings because it focuses on budget/cost data.

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 explicitly says 'Use this for cost roll-ups across planned headcount' and gives a concrete example, which tells the agent when to select this tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the use-case guidance is specific enough to route correctly.

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