Get temporary absences

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the REST path and 'Body fields: none' as modest operational context, but it does not disclose anything deeper such as auth requirements, response shape, or open-world behavior; no contradiction exists.

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 compact and the endpoint is front-loaded, but the first sentence is essentially a repeat of the title and the path restates the same resource. It is not bloated, yet not every sentence earns its place.

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 simple GET list operation, the combination of the description, the rich query-parameter schema, and the safety annotations is largely sufficient. There is no output schema, but the resource name makes the return type obvious and the reference link provides an escape hatch for additional API details.

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 schema provides 100% coverage of the query parameter semantics, including documented names, comma-joining, and explicit offset/limit pagination. The tool description adds 'Body fields: none' but no additional meaning for the query object, so the baseline 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 ('Get temporary absences') and ties it to the exact endpoint GET /api/xm/1/temporary-absences. This unambiguously separates it from the create/delete temporary-absence siblings by both operation and path.

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?

Usage is implied by the HTTP verb and resource: this is the retrieval tool for temporary absences, not the create or delete one. However, the description never explicitly routes away from xmatters_create_a_temporary_absence or xmatters_delete_a_temporary_absence, nor does it state which query scenarios are best served here.

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