Employee Finder

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses only that pagination is supported; it says nothing about credit consumption (relevant given the get_credits sibling), auth requirements, rate limits, or result freshness for what appears to be an enrichment/lookup tool.

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 with the core action front-loaded and no filler. Structure is good, though the middle sentence leans on marketing phrasing ('target organizations') that adds little operational value.

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 simple two-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description adequately conveys purpose and return contents (roles, contact info). It is thin on credit cost and how results differ from the many sibling lookup tools, which limits an agent's ability to choose 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It never names company_name or limit; 'Supports pagination for large companies' only loosely gestures at the limit parameter and gives no range, default, or format guidance.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Find employees of a specific company') and enumerates what it returns (team members, roles, contact info). It is distinguishable from siblings like find_email or search_profile, though it never explicitly says how it relates to them.

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 when-to-use guidance or alternatives are named despite a crowded sibling set (find_email, find_personal_email, search_profile, find_role). 'Discover team members... within target organizations' hints at prospecting use but does not state conditions or exclusions.

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