Who's out

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description's job is to add behavior beyond safety. It does this by disclosing the per-call record-limit refusal, clarifying that holidays do not count toward that limit, and describing the response entry shapes.

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?

Three sentences, each carrying distinct information: the core purpose, the default range and response entry types, and the failure/limit behavior. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, with no filler or redundancy.

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?

All essential call information is present: optional parameters and defaults, response entry types, and the failure mode involving the per-call limit. Since there is no output schema, the description compensates by clearly describing the response shape.

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?

The schema has 100% parameter description coverage, documenting start and end with YYYY-MM-DD format and defaults. The description restates the default range but adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides; the record-limit note is operational behavior rather than parameter semantics.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and the exact resource (employees out of office and company holidays) and further clarifies the two entry types, timeOff and holiday. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that cover only one category, such as company holidays or time-off requests.

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?

It provides clear usage context: an optional date range with defaults (today through 14 days ahead) and an explicit corrective instruction to use a shorter range if the per-call record limit is exceeded. It does not name sibling alternatives, so it falls short of full when-to-use-versus-alternatives guidance.

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