Get remaining time off

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and excels: it discloses read-only nature, explains the per-bucket structure (units, expiresOn, daysUntilExpiry), warns about losing time, and confirms the list order. This is comprehensive behavioral 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 concise (~80 words), front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence serves a purpose: identifying buckets, warning about unit mixing, explaining expiration, and noting read-only nature.

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 no output schema and no parameters, the description fully covers what the tool returns, how to use the data (spend soonest-expiring), and important caveats (different units). It leaves no obvious gaps.

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?

There are no parameters (schema coverage 100%, 0 params), so baseline is 4. The description adds value by explaining what each bucket contains and how to interpret the results, enhancing the schema's implicit emptiness.

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 that the tool returns remaining time off per bucket (holidays, paid leave, etc.), with specific verb 'get' and resource 'time off balance'. It is distinct from sibling tools like request_time_off or cancel_time_off_request.

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 explicit guidance: never add buckets together due to different units, and suggests spending the soonest-expiring bucket first. It implies usage for checking leave balances, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.

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