List time off

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

Annotations already declare this as a safe, idempotent, read-only listing. The description adds meaningful data-shape context: time off carries dates and sometimes hours, blocked hours carry date-times, and the maximum range is 31 days. It stops short of describing pagination or the full return shape.

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 definition is two tight sentences with the resource and scope front-loaded. Every clause, including the remove_time_off routing hint, earns its place.

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 read-only, fully described three-parameter listing with no output schema, the description covers the two result kinds and the date-range limit well. It is slightly incomplete only in not giving any sense of the returned item fields or pagination.

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%, so from/to/staff_id are already fully documented, including the 31-day maximum. The description reinforces the date-range semantics but adds little parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Lists time off ... and blocked hours') and explains the two kinds it returns. It also distinguishes itself from mutation siblings by noting that time_off_id goes to remove_time_off.

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 context is clear: use it for a date range of at most 31 days, covering both Shifts time off and calendar blocked hours. It points to remove_time_off for deletion, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it versus add_time_off or other list tools.

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