boond_absences_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'Search' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly confirm this, nor does it disclose pagination behavior, default return size, or how filters combine. It also does not mention whether an empty filter set returns all absences or requires at least one criterion.

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 action and the key filter dimensions. It contains no fluff and is appropriately sized for a simple search operation, though it sacrifices detail for brevity.

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?

With 7 optional parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain the response format, pagination, or the effect of combining multiple filters. An agent would not know if a search without filters returns all absences or requires at least one filter, nor what fields are returned. This is insufficient for a tool with this many options.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It names the filter categories (resource, date range, status, type) that map to resourceId, startDate/endDate, status, and type, but it does not explain parameter formats (e.g., date-time syntax), default values, or the meaning of each enum. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema property names.

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 a verb ('search') and a resource ('absences') and enumerates the filter dimensions (resource, date range, status, type). It distinguishes from other _search tools by the resource type, but it does not explicitly differentiate from boond_absences_get (which likely retrieves a single absence) or from other search tools with similar patterns.

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 is given on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. It does not state that this is the primary way to list absences, nor does it mention when to prefer boond_absences_get for a single record. The context implies a list/search purpose, but the description offers no explicit conditions or exclusions.

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