get_leave_history

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

The description lacks behavioral details beyond the verb 'get'. No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden, but it does not disclose side effects, authorization needs, or the scope of history retrieved. The output schema exists but its content is not described.

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 very short (two sentences), but it omits critical usage details. Conciseness is achieved at the cost of completeness, making it less effective for an AI agent.

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 simple tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is adequate but not thorough. It lacks information about the scope of history (e.g., date range) and fails to integrate with sibling tool distinctions.

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 parameter 'emp_id' has a textual description in the docstring ('Employee ID'), which adds meaning beyond the schema's title 'Emp Id'. However, the description is minimal and does not clarify expected format or constraints.

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 tool retrieves 'leave history of an employee' using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'get_employee_leave_balance', which could cause confusion.

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_employee_leave_balance'. There is no mention of prerequisites or context such as required permissions or data availability.

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