Retrieve day-wise attendance breakdown with working days and per-date status or reason. Use it to check daily attendance records and identify absences.
Day-wise attendance breakdown (working days, per-date status/reason).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.1Input schema / properties / tenant_idRemoved value: -{
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "default": null,
- "title": "Tenant Id"
-}v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It lists some output content, but does not state whether the operation is read-only, what permissions are needed, or any other behavioral traits; the output schema exists but does not replace safety and usage 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?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It communicates the scope and the included data fields efficiently.
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 zero-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and return content. However, because annotations are absent and the sibling get_attendance is not contrasted, the definition is only minimally complete for an agent navigating this toolset.
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 tool has zero parameters, and the description adds no parameter semantics because there are none to describe. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and nothing in the description contradicts or enhances that.
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 scope: day-wise attendance with working days and per-date status/reason. It is clear enough for an agent to identify the tool's purpose, but it does not differentiate this tool from the sibling get_attendance, leaving ambiguity about which one to select.
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?
Usage is implied by the phrase 'day-wise attendance breakdown,' suggesting this should be used when daily detail is needed. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusion criteria, and no mention of the sibling get_attendance, so the agent must infer the correct context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.