rx_find_employees

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with «Только чтение» plus the added detail that every query token is matched across name, position, and department, and that inactive records are excluded by default. Some redundancy with annotations, but the tokenization rule and default-filter behavior are genuinely useful additions.

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 core search semantics and the returned fields are front-loaded in the first clause, followed by the usage pointer and default-scope note. It is somewhat dense with parenthetical detail, but every sentence contributes.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description lists the return fields (Id, должность, подразделение, почта), which is exactly what an agent needs to map results to the Id required by downstream create-task calls.

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 goes beyond it by explaining how the query string is split into tokens and matched across multiple fields, which is not conveyed by the schema's simpler 'фамилия или часть имени' note. The include_inactive default is also restated with its effect.

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?

Names a specific verb (Найти) and resource (сотрудников), and spells out the searchable fields (ФИО, должность, подразделение) with concrete example queries. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like rx_find_entity or rx_find_documents.

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?

Explicitly states the primary use case: call this before rx_create_simple_task to obtain the executor's Id, or to discover who's who. It also names the default scope (active employees only) and the include_inactive escape hatch, leaving nothing to inference.

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