get_leave_history

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It fails to state whether this is a read-only or mutating action, what data is returned (e.g., list of leave records, dates, statuses), or any limitations (e.g., date range, employee scope). The description is insufficient for a tool with zero annotation support.

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 short sentence, which is concise, but lacks any structured detail. It is front-loaded with the key action, yet important behavioral and usage information is missing, making it under-specified rather than appropriately concise.

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 has one required parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is highly incomplete. It does not explain what 'leave history' contains, how to interpret results, or any constraints. A simple tool might be acceptable with more detail, but this falls short.

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 0%, and there is no explanation of the 'employee_id' parameter beyond the schema. The description adds no meaning, such as format (e.g., UUID, email), required access, or how the ID relates to the employee. For a required parameter, this is a significant gap.

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 'Get leave history for the employee', indicating a read operation on leave records. It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('leave history'), but does not differentiate from siblings like 'get_leave_balance' which also reads but returns balance data.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. For example, it doesn't clarify that 'apply_leave' is for creating requests or that 'get_leave_balance' shows remaining days. The description gives no context on appropriate use cases.

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