freee personal application list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds context by scoping to the current employee and listing statuses, but does not disclose additional behaviors like pagination or response format beyond what schema already covers.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with no unnecessary 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?

Given the simple list operation, strong annotations (readOnly, idempotent), and a schema that documents the page parameter, the description is mostly sufficient. However, the ambiguous 'complete' versus 'all' and lack of return-value details keep it from being fully complete.

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 50%. The page parameter is well-documented in the schema, but the status parameter only has an enum. The description re-states statuses but uses 'complete' instead of the enum value 'all', introducing ambiguity and potentially misleading an agent. It adds no meaningful parameter semantics beyond the 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 the verb 'Read' and the specific resource 'current employee's personal application list' with statuses. It distinguishes from sibling tools like freee_personal_application_detail by specifying it is a list operation.

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 gives clear context: it reads the current employee's personal application list, scoped to specific statuses. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use compared to sibling list tools like freee_approvals_list.

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