get_leave_stats

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 does disclose two behavioral constraints – results are scoped to the authenticated employee and to one date – which implies a safe, read-only, non-mutating call. But it says nothing about what the 'stats' contain or whether any permissions are required beyond being signed in.

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?

A single tight sentence with the resource and both scope constraints front-loaded. Nothing is wasted and nothing is buried.

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 one-parameter, no-output-schema tool the description covers scope adequately, but with no output schema the meaning of 'leave stats' is never grounded – an agent cannot tell what fields come back. Minimal but serviceable.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents the YYYY-MM-DD format and the 'defaults to today' behavior. The description reinforces the single-date semantics ('on one date') but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource (leave stats) and narrows the scope to the signed-in employee and a single date. It does not, however, distinguish itself from close siblings like get_leave_balance, get_leave_plan_status, or get_leave_requests, and 'stats' remains an abstract noun an agent must interpret.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of the many sibling leave tools. The agent must infer from the name alone when this is preferable to get_leave_balance or get_leave_transactions.

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