search_employees

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It states it returns a list with basic info, but does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior or mention any side effects. The search function implies a read operation, but lacks explicit disclosure.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose first, then parameters listed in a readable docstring format. It is slightly verbose with line breaks, but each sentence adds value.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and siblings that include similar search tools, the description adequately explains all inputs and return value. However, it could benefit from mentioning pagination beyond the limit parameter or more details on output structure.

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 0%, but the description compensates fully with detailed explanations for each parameter, including partial match for name, enum values for status, and default for limit. This adds critical meaning beyond the schema's type and default fields.

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 'Search for employees by various criteria.', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_employee' by implying multiple results and flexible filtering.

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 lists parameters and defaults, implicitly indicating when to use filters. However, it lacks explicit guidance on choosing this tool over alternatives like 'get_employee' for single employee lookup or 'search_reviews' for different entities.

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