Kasra Get Submitted Requests

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose what the call returns (the submitted-request list plus approval/rejection status), adding context beyond the tool name, but it does not address read-only semantics, permissions, pagination, or limits.

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 compact Persian sentence with the core purpose front-loaded and no filler words. It could be structured to separate usage from behavior, but the size is appropriate for a simple list tool.

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?

With an output schema present and all three parameters documented in the schema, the description need not explain return values. It covers the purpose and scope but misses usage guidance and behavioral disclosure, which matter more here because no annotations are provided.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The 'بازه زمانی' (time period) clause loosely maps to start_date/end_date but adds no format or filtering semantics beyond what the schema already documents, and the 'reason' parameter is not addressed at all.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'دریافت لیست درخواست‌های ثبت‌شده (مجوزها، مرخصی‌ها، مأموریت‌ها)' — retrieve the list of submitted requests (permits, leaves, missions) — and adds the approval/rejection-status detail. This clearly differentiates it from sibling get_* tools like kasra_get_daily_report or kasra_get_cartable_items, none of which cover submitted requests.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives; no sibling names or exclusion conditions are mentioned. The only usage hint is the date-range clause 'در بازه زمانی', which implies a filtering scope but does not help an agent choose between this and the many other kasra_get_* tools.

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