freee_get_expense_application

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Describes what is retrieved (line items, approvers, comments, logs), indicating a read-only operation. Does not mention side effects, permissions, or return format, but the description gives sufficient behavioral context for a GET operation.

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 that front-load the purpose. Every word adds value. The Japanese parenthetical may be extraneous but does not detract significantly.

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?

Given no output schema, the description adequately explains the return contents (line items, approvers, comments, approval flow logs). Mentions specific fields (current_step_id, current_round) needed for follow-up actions. Could provide more structure, but sufficient for a simple retrieval tool.

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%, baseline 3. The description adds meaning by noting that companyId is optional and that expenseApplicationId is required. It also hints at the output (current_step_id, current_round) which adds value beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Get', specific resource 'expense application details', and lists contents (line items, approvers, comments, logs). Differentiates from sibling 'freee_get_expense_applications' by focusing on a single application's details.

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 says to use this tool to get 'current_step_id and current_round needed for approval actions', implying it should be called before approval. Does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but sibling context suggests it is the singular retrieval tool.

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