list_hr_cases

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no further behavioral context such as pagination, access control, or scope. It only restates the purpose, which is already clear from the annotation.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with action and object, no waste.

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 simple list semantics, annotated read-only behavior, and fully documented parameters, the one-sentence description is sufficient. It doesn't need to explain return values since no output schema exists and the tool's behavior is straightforward.

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%, with each parameter having a description. The description's mention of 'status, subject person, service' merely renames existing parameters (state, subject_person, hr_service) without adding syntax or value details.

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' and the resource 'HR cases', and specifies optional filters. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_hr_case (single case) and list_hr_tasks (different resource).

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 retrieving a list of HR cases with optional filtering, but doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions. It provides clear context that this is a listing tool with filter capabilities.

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