toast_search_employees

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals only that this is a search operation, but fails to mention what a successful match returns, whether matching is partial or exact, pagination behavior, or the role of restaurantGuid. The agent is left without important behavioral expectations.

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, focused sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and searchable fields, making it easy to scan and understand at a glance.

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 search tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description is not complete. It omits the meaning of restaurantGuid, return value shape, search behavior, and any constraints. The agent may be able to guess the query input but not reliably invoke the tool correctly.

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 adds meaning to the query parameter by specifying it accepts a name, email, or phone, which is valuable since schema descriptions are empty. However, the optional restaurantGuid parameter is not described at all, and the description only partially compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 'Search', the resource 'employees', and the specific search fields 'name, email, or phone'. This makes the tool's purpose immediately understandable and differentiates it from listing all employees or retrieving a single employee by ID.

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 implies usage when the caller has a name, email, or phone to search by, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives like toast_list_employees or toast_get_employee, nor does it state when not to use this tool. Context is implied, not made explicit.

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