No it doesn't. It does not give Congress any authority over Presidential (executive) officers. What powers it has is specific to what is stated in that section, nothing else. It is not a general power over all of government. If it was, the Supreme Court could never overturn anything Congress does.
Quote what you say allows Congress to prohibit the president from firing one of his employees:
https://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec8.html
You are either bull****ing or lying and I really don't care to sort out the difference these days. .
As Harshaw pointed out to you,
every executive agency is regulated by congress. That should have been enough for you to think "hrm...maybe I should look into this before typing any more."
One could also note that the APA (Administrative Procedure Act) tightly regulates the operations of
any and all executive agencies (or if you wish to call them it, "departments"). It also grants judicial review to various agency actions. For example, the lawsuits about repeal of DACA had
absolutely nothing to do with the power of EOs the question was instead about whether or not DHS complied with the APA in rescinding the memo that implmented DACA (specifically with regards to its fact-finding procedures or complete lack thereof, in this case).
In fact, without legislative oversight, most agency functions - the quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial functions - would almost certainly be unconstitutional. That is because they make regulations that have the force of law and can rule on violations of those regulations, imposing penalties. The former is deemed "quasi-legislative" authority and the latter "quasi-judicial". Without the APA and similar legislative acts governing executive agencies, the executive could wield the power of all three branches through executive agencies.
That would be untenable. There's even a good argument to be made that the existing arrangement violates the constitution in principle but is nonetheless necessary to the functioning of the country (since congress cannot possibly do all the things executive agencies do). SCOTUS quashed that quite a while back, but that doesn't mean it is logically wrong. Anyway, back on track:
A special prosecutor ('counsel') may be appointed by the president's AG (who leads the DOJ), but that by no means means that he is exempt from congressional oversight. He is overseen by the DOJ, itself an executive agency subject to the APA and various law. He is thus subject to certain regulations in the CMR that grant him authority and define his duties. That is why the appointment letter for Mueller says in part:
(b) The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including:
(i) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and
(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and
(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. s. 600.4(a).
(c) If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters.
(d) Sections 600.4 through 600.10 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations are applicable to the special counsel.
And to note just one of those regulations, observe:
28 C.F.R. s. 600.4(a):
(a) . . . The jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall also include the authority to investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses; and to conduct appeals arising out of the matter being investigated and/or prosecuted.
That is a regulation, passed by an executive agency created by congress and regulated by congress via the APA (and any other legislation they may make affecting the agency's enabling statute). It governs all special counsel appointed by or through the AG ("DOJ" more broadly); here Rosenstein, because Sessions recused himself.