clokio_attendance_range

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the 31-day range limit as useful behavioral context, but it does not disclose what the returned attendance data contains or whether any additional access constraints exist.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the core purpose and immediately follows it with the critical 31-day limit. There is no filler, repetition, or irrelevant detail.

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-only tool with two required date parameters, no nested objects, and annotations covering safety, this is mostly sufficient. The main gaps are the absence of an output description and the lack of explicit routing among the attendance-related sibling tools.

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?

Both parameters are already documented in the schema with YYYY-MM-DD format, so the schema contributes the baseline. The description adds meaningful semantic information by imposing a maximum span of 31 days between start_date and end_date, which is not present in the schema.

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 identifies the resource ('Attendance') and its scope ('date range') with an explicit 31-day cap, so an agent can tell this is an attendance-range query. However, it lacks a direct verb like 'get/list' and does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as clokio_attendance_daily or clokio_attendance_summary.

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 'max 31 days' constraint gives a clear boundary for valid usage, but it does not state when to choose this tool over alternatives like clokio_attendance_daily, clokio_attendance_summary, or clokio_attendance_for_employee. The intended use is implied by the date-range phrasing rather than explicitly guided.

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