get-timeoff

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Get', which implies read-only, but does not mention auth requirements, response size, or any side effects. The lack of detail means the agent cannot fully anticipate behavior.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose ('Get detailed information'). No wasted words, but it could be slightly more informative without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should hint at return fields. 'Detailed information' is vague; the agent doesn't know what fields (e.g., dates, status, type) to expect. For a simple get tool, this is a notable gap.

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 coverage is 100% (timeoff_id is documented in the schema). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; both say essentially the same thing. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already handles parameter context.

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 ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific time off entry'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list-timeoff (which returns multiple entries) and approve-timeoff/reject-timeoff (which modify state). The specificity of 'a specific time off entry' differentiates it from get-timeoff-calendar.

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 use when needing details of one entry, but provides no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative tools. Given the many sibling tools, explicit guidance (e.g., 'use list-timeoff to see all entries') would improve clarity.

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