get_employee_details

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only operation ('Get details'), but does not elaborate on what 'details' entails, any prerequisites, or side effects. For a zero-parameter tool, it is adequate but minimal.

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, concise sentence that conveys the purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is somewhat complete but lacks specifics on what 'details' are returned (e.g., name, email, role). The agent may need additional context to understand the tool's output.

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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage (empty schema), baseline is 4. The description adds meaning by specifying 'of the current logged-in employee (yourself)', which clarifies the implicit parameter (the user identity).

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'details of the current logged-in employee (yourself)', leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_person_detail' which could be for other employees.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_person_detail' or 'list_people'. The context of siblings implies it is for one's own details, but the description does not provide explicit usage context or exclusions.

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