List Leave Requests

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the returned fields and implies a limitation (no full approval detail) via the second sentence. However, it does not mention read-only behavior, pagination, or response structure beyond the schema, leaving some behavioral aspects implicit.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. It front-loads the main purpose and then gives a helpful pointer to an alternative. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The tool has 14 parameters and no output schema, so the description could do more to summarize the tool's capabilities and return shape. It lists a few output fields but fails to mention that it supports broad filtering (employee, department, location, date ranges, etc.) and that max_records enforces a client-side limit. The schema covers these, but the description leaves the overall context somewhat incomplete for an agent deciding whether to use this tool.

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%, so the schema already documents all 14 parameters in detail. The description mentions some concepts (status, absence reason, dates, description) but does not add meaning beyond the schema. Thus, the baseline score of 3 applies as the description provides no extra parameter clarification.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get employee leave (time off) requests' and lists key output fields. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling get_leave_request by noting that the latter provides 'full approval detail on one request', which clarifies the scope of this tool.

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 explicitly mentions an alternative: 'Use get_leave_request for full approval detail on one request.' This provides a clear when-not/alternative hint, and the list-oriented purpose is evident from the name and the description, making usage guidance effectively explicit.

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