Get Who's Out

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. 'View' implies read-only, and the description discloses the return structure in detail (mixed events, fields, summary counts). However, it does not mention any potential side effects, auth requirements, or limitations. The return format is a useful behavioral disclosure, but authentication and rate limits are absent.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by a clear understanding of return format. No wasted 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?

The description explains the return types and fields, but 'summary counts' is vague and no structural details are provided for the counts. Without an output schema or annotations, more clarity on the response object would be needed for full completeness. The core purpose is clear, but edge cases and limits are unaddressed.

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%, with both start and end parameters clearly documented including defaults. The description adds no param-specific details beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 the verb 'View' and resource 'upcoming time off and holidays for a date range', which is specific. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'get-time-off-requests', but the inclusion of holidays and mixed event types implies a broader scope.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions or prerequisites. The tool simply states its function without context.

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