book_holiday

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It explains each parameter's effect (e.g., admin-only overrides, notification suppression) and implies a write operation, but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., duplicate request handling, approval flow details beyond book_as_requestee). The behavior is partially transparent but lacks completeness.

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 description is structured as a clear docstring with a brief summary and an Args list. While it is lengthy due to 14 parameters, it is well-organized and front-loaded with the purpose. Minor redundancy (e.g., 'book time off' in summary) but overall efficient.

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 the tool's complexity (14 parameters, 3 required) and lack of output schema, the description covers parameters but omits the return value (e.g., the created leave request ID) and prerequisites (e.g., user existence, leave type validity). It references list_leave_types but not explicitly as a prerequisite. Could be more complete for agent decision-making.

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 0% description coverage, meaning no parameter descriptions in the JSON. The description compensates fully by explaining all 14 parameters, including format (YYYY-MM-DD), enum values (AM/PM), and admin-only flags. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw 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?

The description clearly states 'Submit a leave request (book time off).' It uses a specific verb (submit/book) and resource (leave request), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_holidays or get_holiday by focusing on creation.

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 parameter explanations and references list_leave_types for leave_type_id, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like action_holiday. No 'use this when' or 'instead of' statements are present, leaving the agent to infer context from the action.

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