create_submission

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions multi-date support, adding value beyond the schema. However, it does not disclose side effects (e.g., quota deduction, creation status), authorization needs, or failure conditions, leaving significant gaps.

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, well-structured sentence of 7 words. It is front-loaded with the main action and resource, and every word serves a purpose. No redundancy or unnecessary 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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and siblings like cancel_submission and get_my_submissions, the description provides adequate context for a simple creation action but lacks explanation of post-submission outcomes (e.g., awaiting approval) or return values.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond stating multi-date support, which is already implied by the schema's array type and minItems.

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 'Ajukan' (submit) and the resource 'izin/cuti/sakit' (permission/leave/sick), along with a distinguishing feature 'mendukung multi-date' (supports multi-date). This effectively differentiates from siblings like cancel_submission and get_leave_quota.

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 usage for submitting leave/permission requests and highlights multi-date support, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., cancel_submission) or mention prerequisites like leave quota. No exclusions or context-sensitive guidance is provided.

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