list_ukg_employees

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It adds useful context by indicating results are limited to what the configured API user can see, but it does not mention pagination, result format, or explicitly confirm whether this is a read-only operation beyond what 'List' implies.

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, front-loaded sentence that achieves high clarity with zero filler. Every word adds value: the verb, the object, and the visibility qualifier.

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 endpoint with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description and the schema together provide enough to invoke the tool effectively. The scope qualifier adds useful context, and the schema covers the endpoint override and query parameters, so no critical information is missing.

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?

Parameter semantics are already fully documented in the input schema: 'path' explains its override default and 'query' notes additional UKG tenant parameters. The description adds no extra parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 clear verb 'List' with a specific resource 'employees' and adds a meaningful scope qualifier ('visible to the configured UKG Ready API user'), making it easy to distinguish from the singular get_ukg_employee and the generic call_ukg_endpoint.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_ukg_employee or call_ukg_endpoint. No exclusions, prerequisites, or comparison points are given beyond the implied permission-scoped visibility.

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