Kasra Get Monthly Report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. The verb 'دریافت' (get) implies a read-only operation and the described content is a report, which signals safety. However, it does not explicitly state that no data is modified, whether permissions or authentication are needed, or how the period is determined beyond what the parameter schema already says. For a simple get tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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 two short sentences: the first states the main purpose, the second lists the report contents. It is concise, front-loaded, and contains no filler or redundant text.

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 read-only report tool with an output schema and fully documented optional parameters, the core semantics are covered. The main missing piece is usage guidance relative to the daily report and dashboard siblings. It is adequate but not fully complete for an agent deciding between related report 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%: both parameters have meaningful descriptions, including the default behavior for period_id ('در صورت خالی بودن، دوره جاری لود می‌شود'). The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning, 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'دریافت گزارش سرجمع کارکرد ماهانه پرسنل' (get the monthly summary report of personnel performance). It enumerates the included metrics (کل حضور، کارکرد خالص، مازاد حضور، کسرحضور، اضافه‌کار، مرخصی‌ها و مأموریت‌ها), making it clear this is the monthly aggregate report and differentiating it from kasra_get_daily_report.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus kasra_get_daily_report, kasra_get_dashboard_summary, or kasra_export_daily_report_excel. No conditions, exclusions, or alternatives are mentioned. The only period-related hint ('اگر خالی باشد دوره جاری لود می‌شود') lives in the schema, not the description.

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