Hierarchy: employee listings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral details beyond annotations: it explains cursor-based pagination (items array with hasNext flag) and permission requirements. No contradictions.

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 three sentences, front-loading the purpose and then adding response structure, restrictions, and requirements. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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 there is no output schema, the description adequately describes the return format (items array, hasNext flag for pagination). It covers the essential aspects: what it does, how pagination works, required permissions, and the source of employeeId. The mention of hierarchy_get_employees_v1 ties well into the sibling tools.

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% with good descriptions. The overall description adds meaning by explaining the response structure (items and hasNext) which ties into the lastItemId pagination parameter. It also reinforces that employeeId is from hierarchy_get_employees_v1. This goes beyond the schema's individual parameter descriptions.

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 'Returns the IDs of listings assigned to a specific hierarchy employee, filtered by category'. The verb 'returns' and the specific resource 'IDs of listings' with the scope 'per employee' make it unambiguous. It also differentiates from company-wide listing by explicitly stating that is not available.

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 gives explicit context: it requires hierarchy permissions, and the employeeId comes from hierarchy_get_employees_v1, establishing a clear prerequisite. It also states that fetching listings for the whole company is not available, which helps avoid misuse. However, it does not provide alternative tools for company-wide listings (since not available) but that is acceptable.

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