Search Personio Capabilities

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that it searches for 'capabilities and examples,' which is contextual beyond annotations. No contradiction is present.

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 very concise—two sentences that convey the tool's action and usage guidance. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

While the description is clear for a meta-tool, it lacks detail on what 'capabilities and examples' means and does not explain the response format. No output schema is provided, so agents may be uncertain about the output structure. However, given the tool's simplicity, this is acceptable.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. However, the description does not mention either parameter (limit or query), leaving the agent to infer their function from names alone. This is insufficient.

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's purpose: 'Search the Personio MCP server capabilities and examples.' It uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('capabilities and examples'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools (which are specific actions like absences, attendances) by being a meta-tool for discovery.

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 explicitly says 'Use this first when deciding which tool to call,' which provides clear when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the 'first' directive implies it should be used before other tools.

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