timeiq_expense_list_person

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

The description discloses that the tool is read-only and requires admin privileges. However, it does not mention response format, pagination, or date format. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden, and this is a moderate disclosure.

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 sentence of 12 words, conveying essential information without any fluff. Every word contributes to clarity.

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 3 required parameters (slug, start_date, end_date) but the description only references the slug. It does not explain how the date parameters affect the listing or their format. Given no output schema, the description is insufficient for an agent to correctly invoke the tool with proper date inputs.

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 description mentions 'by their slug', clarifying that slug identifies the person, but does not explain the slug parameter itself or the start_date/end_date parameters. With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds minimal meaning beyond 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 states the verb 'List', the resource 'expense entries for a specific person', and the scope 'by their slug (Admin only)'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like timeiq_expense_list_me by specifying 'for a specific person' and 'Admin only'.

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 provides clear context: 'for a specific person' implies it is not for the current user, and 'Admin only' indicates required permissions. It contrasts with timeiq_expense_list_me. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternative tools.

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