Get an employer profile

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds useful context ('public profile' and 'one employer'), but does not mention not-found behavior or return shape. This is acceptable for a simple getter but not deeply transparent.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every phrase carries meaning: public, profile, one employer, by id.

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?

For a read-only fetch by ID with one parameter, the description covers the essential selection and invocation needs. It states what is returned ('public profile'), the cardinality ('one'), and the lookup method ('by id'). Not-found behavior would be a nice addition but is not critical here.

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?

The description says 'by id', which maps the single required parameter to a lookup key, but it does not explain the source or format of employer_id beyond the schema's integer type and bounds. With only one required parameter, this is adequate but minimal.

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?

States a specific verb ('get'), resource ('employer profile'), and scope ('by id'). This clearly distinguishes it from list-type tools and other get-by-id tools like get_project or get_freelancer.

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?

Usage is implied: call this when you need one employer's public profile and have an employer_id. There are no explicit exclusions or alternatives, but the simple read-by-id nature makes the context reasonably clear.

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