Read a worker profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond those: the tool returns a catalog of fetchable tasks rather than the raw profile data itself, organizes results by section, and reflects only the caller's own existing Workday permissions. No contradiction with 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?

Three sentences with no filler, front-loaded with what the tool does, then input guidance, then downstream routing, then a safety note. Every sentence earns its place and the structure leads with the most important information for an agent.

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?

With one parameter, no output schema, and strong annotations, the description covers all an agent needs: input provenance, accepted formats, output shape at a high level, downstream tool to invoke, and permission constraints. Nothing required to call the tool correctly is missing.

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. The description adds value by specifying acceptable input forms (`profileUri` from `workday_get_org_chart`, any reference, or bare id like `247$42`) and naming a concrete source of the URI, which supplements the schema's generic examples.

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?

Description names the specific action (Read a worker's Workday profile) and the exact deliverable (a CATALOG of everything readable, organized by sections). It distinguishes itself from the sibling workday_get_worker_task by explicitly directing the agent to that tool for opening individual tasks.

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 states where to get input (`profileUri` from `workday_get_org_chart` or any reference) and how to proceed after the call (`use workday_get_worker_task`). It also notes permission limitations. It does not explicitly enumerate when to prefer siblings like workday_get_my_profile, but the flow guidance is clear enough.

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