Get Company Employees

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses the data source (/people/ page), the unique demographics view, and a behavioral limitation compared to search_people ('That path also returns more result pages'). It also warns about exact slug requirements with a concrete example, adding context beyond annotations.

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 the core purpose in the first sentence. Each subsequent paragraph earns its place: alternatives, filter semantics, and a critical slug caveat. There is no redundant or filler content.

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's complexity (exact slug requirement, optional filter, unique demographics) and the presence of an output schema, the description fully covers what the tool returns, when to use it, and pitfalls. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke 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?

Although the schema already describes both parameters at 100% coverage, the description adds significant practical meaning: the company_name must be the exact LinkedIn URL slug, not the display name, and provides the Anthropic/anthropicresearch mismatch example. It also elaborates on the keywords filter scope.

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 'List employees at a company from the LinkedIn /people/ page' and highlights the unique demographics aggregate. It explicitly differentiates from sibling search_people by noting when to prefer the alternative.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'For filtered search by network degree (1st/2nd/3rd) or location, prefer search_people with current_company set' and 'If you are unsure of the slug, call search_companies first'. This tells the agent exactly when to use alternative tools.

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