Hierarchy: employee listings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it is read-only and returns a paginated response with items and hasNext flag. While it does not contradict annotations, it only adds moderate behavioral context beyond what annotations imply.

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-loaded with the primary purpose, followed by key details and usage notes. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, achieving high efficiency.

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 has 3 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately describes the return structure (items array, hasNext flag) and constraints (per employee, permissions required). It covers essential aspects for an agent to use the tool, though slightly more detail on the response format would be ideal.

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 all three parameters having descriptions. The description adds minimal extra semantics: it notes that employeeId should be taken from hierarchy_get_employees_v1 and that lastItemId is a pagination cursor. These reinforce the schema but do not significantly extend meaning.

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 returns IDs of listings assigned to a specific employee, filtered by category. It specifies the resource (listings) and action (list items by employee). However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling hierarchy tools beyond mentioning that employeeId comes from hierarchy_get_employees_v1.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use: requires hierarchy permissions, employeeId must come from hierarchy_get_employees_v1, and it notes that fetching for the whole company is not available (only per employee). This sets clear usage boundaries. It does not list alternative tools for company-wide fetching, but the context is sufficient.

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