remove_employment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it labels the tool as a write operation and discloses a safety behavior ('Checks the record belongs to this candidate before deleting it'). It does not state whether the deletion is reversible, what permissions are required, or what happens on a mismatched ID.

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 short, front-loaded statements with no filler; the purpose and write-operation warning come first, followed by ID discovery. The trailing line break and fragment style is slightly ragged but nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. The description covers purpose, destructive nature, ID sourcing, and a validation guarantee, leaving only reversibility/auth details unstated.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond it by explaining how to obtain each ID and noting that employment_id comes from the candidate's employments array via get_candidate.

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 ('Remove') and resource ('an employment entry from a candidate'), and immediately classifies it as a write operation, distinguishing it from siblings like remove_education and add_employment.

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?

Gives concrete discovery paths for both required parameters (search_candidates_by_name for candidate_id, get_candidate → employments array for employment_id), which is exactly the how-to-use guidance an agent needs. It stops short of stating when not to use it or what alternatives exist for employment edits.

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