get_department_functions

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the operation is free and returns codes, but does not explicitly state it is read-only or idempotent. The name 'get_' implies read-only, but the description could be more explicit about safety.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the category 'Reference data' and includes essential information about purpose and cost. No wasted words.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key points: what is returned, its purpose, and cost. It could optionally describe the return format, but it is sufficient for an agent to understand and use the 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?

There are no parameters, so the description has no burden to explain them. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description confirms it returns all codes without filtering.

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 'all department function codes' and specifies their use as filter values in people searches. This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes from sibling reference data tools like 'get_departments'.

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 indicates it is reference data that is free with no credits, implying it can be used without cost. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus other reference data tools like 'get_management_levels' or 'get_locations', though the context is reasonably clear.

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