get-time-off-requests

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It signals a read operation through 'Get' and lists filters, but it does not disclose return format, pagination, permissions, or behavior when filters conflict. This is minimal but not misleading.

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 sentence with the primary action and filter list front-loaded. It contains zero redundant words and is easily parsed at a glance.

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 5-parameter tool with 2 required parameters and no output schema, the description gives enough to initiate a call but omits the return shape and does not clarify that the date range is mandatory. It is adequate for a simple filtered list operation but not fully comprehensive.

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 every parameter is already documented in the schema. The description's phrase 'date range, employee, status, or action' restates the parameter set in prose but adds no new format, constraint, or relationship details 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('time-off requests') and explicitly enumerates the filtering dimensions (date range, employee, status, action), making the tool's purpose unmistakable. No sibling tool retrieves time-off requests, so it is clearly distinct from create-time-off-request and estimate-time-off-balance.

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 this is the general-purpose retrieval tool for time-off requests, especially through the phrase 'filtered by date range, employee, status, or action.' However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as get-whos-out or estimate-time-off-balance, nor any exclusions.

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