create_employee

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as mutability, authorization needs, side effects, or return behavior. As a creation tool, it likely mutates state, but that is not explicitly stated, and the burden falls entirely on the description.

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?

While the description is a single short sentence, it fails to add value beyond the tool name. It is under-specified rather than concise—each word does not earn its place because it essentially repeats the name without providing new insight.

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 the tool has no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should compensate by explaining what creating an employee entails, possible effects, or success criteria. It does none of this, leaving the tool incomplete for an agent to use 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?

The input schema has no parameters and 100% schema description coverage (vacuously). The description adds no parameter information, but the baseline is 3 when schema coverage is high. No contradiction or additional meaning is provided beyond 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 'Créer un employé' is a direct translation of the tool name 'create_employee', providing no additional context or differentiation from sibling creation tools like create_client, create_invoice, etc. It is a tautology, restating the name without clarifying scope or uniqueness.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to create an employee vs. a client). There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions, or constraints, leaving the agent with no contextual cues for appropriate invocation.

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