freee_approve_expense_application

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

Indicates it is a mutation function (executes approval actions), but lacks details on idempotency, side effects, or error handling. Without annotations, some behavioral context is missing, such as whether actions are reversible or what happens on failure.

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?

Two sentences, action-focused and front-loaded with the tool's purpose, prerequisite, and action list. No extraneous words.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not mention return values or error behavior. For a mutation tool, knowing what response to expect (e.g., success message, updated object) is important but missing.

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 coverage is 100%, but description adds valuable context by explaining that target_step_id and target_round come from the expense application detail, and by providing Japanese translations for approval actions. This goes beyond the schema's enum descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states the tool can approve, reject, or send back an expense application, naming specific actions and stating it executes approval workflow actions. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like freee_get_expense_application which are read-only.

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?

Explicitly instructs users to use freee_get_expense_application first to obtain required fields (target_step_id, target_round). Does not explicitly state when not to use, but provides necessary prerequisite context.

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