get_employer

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 states what the tool returns and the compact vs. raw distinction is left to the 'raw' parameter schema. It does not mention authentication requirements, error handling, or rate limits. The description is not misleading but offers limited depth beyond the listed fields.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It names the resource and its key output fields compactly, exemplifying optimal conciseness and structure.

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 simple read tool with only two parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It lists the key fields returned, enabling an agent to call it correctly. However, it lacks explicit mention of return format details or edge cases, but these are not critical for a straightforward get operation.

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%, with both parameters ('employer_id' and 'raw') documented in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already explains. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given complete schema 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 ('Get') and resource ('employer profile'), and enumerates the specific fields returned (description, industries, website, vacancy count). This distinguishes it from siblings like search_employers (search) and get_employer_vacancies (vacancies), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 when to use the tool (when a detailed employer profile is needed) but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. It provides clear context for selection but lacks direct exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools.

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