nc_get_civil_servants

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get data', implying a read operation, but gives no details on side effects, permissions, rate limits, pagination, or return format. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 a single concise sentence with no unnecessary words, making it appropriately sized for a simple data retrieval tool. It is front-loaded with the main action and resource, though it lacks supporting detail.

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 no output schema and no behavioral disclosure, the description should offer more context about what kind of data is returned, how the parameters relate, and any limitations. It leaves the agent to infer too much from the schema alone, making it incomplete for confident invocation.

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 schema provides full descriptions for all three parameters (year, limit, employer_type), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific information, neither enhancing nor detracting from what the schema already states.

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 specifies a clear verb ('Get data') and a distinct resource ('New Caledonia and municipal civil servants'). It is unambiguous and easily distinguishable from sibling tools, which cover entirely different domains (holidays, companies, weather, etc.), so an agent can identify it without needing to open the schema.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any context about typical use cases, prerequisites, or when not to use it. Although no direct sibling tool covers civil servants, the description still does not state any usage context, leaving the agent to infer.

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