passgage_list_working_days

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says 'List', which implies a read-only operation, but it does not disclose any non-obvious behavior such as default sorting, whether all items are returned by default, or any dependency on company/user mode. The description adds little beyond the action itself.

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, clear sentence that immediately states the operation and key options. There is no redundant wording, making it appropriately concise for a simple list endpoint.

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 basic paginated list tool with well-documented parameters, the description is minimally sufficient. However, since there is no output schema and many sibling tools exist in different contexts (e.g., company/user mode), the description could have mentioned return format or context dependencies to be more 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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for each parameter, including Ransack-style filters and pagination defaults. The description merely restates that filtering and pagination are optional, adding no additional semantic value beyond the schema. Baseline 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 action 'List' and the resource 'working_days', making it easy to distinguish from get/create/update/delete operations on the same resource. However, it does not differentiate it from other list_* sibling tools beyond the resource name.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as passgage_get_working_day for a single record or passgage_search for more complex queries. The mention of 'optional filtering and pagination' implies a browsing use case, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use advice is given.

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