tlc-portal-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'portal' implies an external system, the description lacks details on side effects, idempotency, or whether submission is reversible via leave.cancel_request.

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 single-sentence description is efficiently front-loaded with no extraneous information, conveying the essential action and target system immediately.

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?

While adequate for a single-parameter tool, the description is incomplete regarding the two-step workflow (prepare then submit) implied by the sibling tools, which is critical information for successful invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates effectively by referencing 'prepared vacation request' (준비된 휴가 신청), which clarifies that the prepared_request_id parameter refers to a request prepared via the prepare_request sibling.

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 tool submits a prepared leave request to a portal, using specific verbs and resources. While it distinguishes from siblings like leave.prepare_request by specifying the submission action, it could further clarify what 'prepared' entails.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and critically fails to mention that leave.prepare_request must be called first to generate the prepared_request_id required by this tool.

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