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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful context that the values are current balances in seconds scoped per employee, but it omits return structure, pagination behavior, and any auth or rate-limit context.

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?

Two short sentences are front-loaded with the result and unit. The GraphQL query name is implementation detail but compact and not harmful.

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 read-only list tool, annotations cover safety and the schema covers pagination and sorting. However, with no output schema, the description only minimally describes the return shape and does not clarify period semantics or response 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 75%, with limit, offset, and sort_direction documented, while sort_by has only an enum. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific resource and unit: current overtime balance in seconds per employee. It is clear what is returned, but it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools such as kiwihr_list_time_off_balances or attendance statements.

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 only identifies the backing GraphQL query and gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. An agent must infer the use case from the name and cannot tell from the description whether to choose this over time-off balance or attendance tools.

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