Get Employee

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states that it 'Returns employee object with fields' and mentions customization, which partially describes behavior. However, it does not disclose error handling, read-only nature, or other operational details. The description adds some value but not rich context.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core action, and avoids unnecessary details. It efficiently conveys the purpose and key behavior without redundancy.

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's simplicity (3 optional parameters, no output schema), the description adequately covers the core functionality. It lists common fields and explains the field selection mechanism. While it doesn't address sibling tool distinctions, the description is sufficient for a straightforward employee data retrieval tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description lists example fields and references the 'fields' parameter, but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. It reinforces the parameter behavior without adding new details.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'employee', and specifies the customizable field selection capability. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get-employee-photo and get-employee-directory by focusing on general employee data with flexible field retrieval.

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 clear context that this is the tool for retrieving employee data with selectable fields. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the broad scope of the tool is self-evident. Sibling tools are specialized, making usage context reasonably clear.

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