Preview a freee monthly attendance action

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

Annotations already declare read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the valuable context that this is a preview returning a binding fingerprint and that no application is changed, enriching the behavioral picture without contradicting annotations.

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 cover purpose, outcome, and safety guarantee with no redundant wording. Every phrase earns its place.

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?

For a 2-parameter tool with rich schema annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential elements: the action type, the read-only nature, and the fingerprint return. A minor gap is that it does not mention that this should precede a commit step, but that is inferable from the sibling tools.

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% and both parameters have detailed descriptions (action enum with meanings, period pattern and behavior). The tool description adds little beyond what the schema already conveys, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 reads and previews a monthly submit or withdrawal action, with a specific outcome (returning a binding fingerprint). This distinguishes it from sibling commit tools and other monthly actions.

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 indicates this is a preview-only step and explicitly states that no application is changed, which tells the agent when to use it (before committing) and when not to use it (to actually apply changes). However, it does not explicitly name the commit counterpart for follow-up.

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