list_absences

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

With no annotations provided, the description alone must convey behavioral traits. It merely says 'list team absences' without outlining whether it returns only current absences, supports filtering, or requires any permissions. No details about output structure or side effects are given, leaving the agent without adequate 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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the essential purpose. It avoids unnecessary words and is appropriately sized for a simple list tool. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient.

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?

The tool is simple with three optional filters fully described in the schema, which reduces the description's burden. However, with no output schema, the description does not explicitly state what the response contains, such as whether it returns a list of absence objects or any pagination info. Given the schema's richness, the description is adequate but could improve by mentioning the return format or filtering capability.

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%, so all parameters (type, start_date, end_date) are already described in the input schema. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond the examples in the text, which merely echo the enum values. Given full schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 lists team absences and gives concrete examples of absence types (vacation, sick leave, home office), which distinguishes it from other absence-related tools like create_absence or get_vacation_stats. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other list tools like list_time_entries or list_events, so it falls slightly short of a 5.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when to choose this over get_vacation_stats or how to combine with create_absence. The only implied usage is that it lists absences, but no explicit context or exclusions are given.

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