get-whos-out

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates a read operation ('Get a list') and states the temporal scope, but it does not define what qualifies as 'out', whether returns are paginated, or what the employee list contains beyond employees.

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 focused sentence with no filler or redundant information. It efficiently communicates the tool's core purpose and temporal scope.

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 two optional, fully described parameters, the definition is mostly adequate. However, there is no output schema and no annotation coverage, and the description does not clarify what fields are returned for each employee or precisely what 'out' includes.

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%; both 'start' and 'end' parameters have descriptions with format and defaults. The description adds little beyond the schema beyond the general date-range concept, so the baseline score 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a clear resource ('list of employees who are currently out or will be out') with a date-range scope. It is unambiguous about what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the similar get-time-off-requests sibling tool.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: when you need employees who are currently out or will be out within a date range. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of full guidance, but the intended use case is explicit.

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