apply_leave

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return value (status message) but omits important behavior such as whether the tool checks leave balance, how conflicts are handled, or whether the action is reversible. A write operation like this needs more disclosure.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core action, followed by structured param docs. Every sentence earns its place, no fluff.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and presence of an output schema, the description is mostly adequate. It covers the action and return value, but lacks contextual guidance on prerequisites or edge cases (e.g., overlapping leave, insufficient balance). The presence of sibling tools like leave balance suggests more context would help.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description includes :param lines adding basic meaning ('Employee ID', 'List of leave dates') beyond the schema's type/title. However, it doesn't clarify date format (e.g., ISO strings, range representation), so the compensation is only partial.

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 tool's action with a specific verb and resource: 'Apply for leave for an employee.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_employee_leave_balance (viewing balance) and get_leave_history (viewing history), making the purpose immediately identifiable.

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 implies usage (when applying for leave) but does not explicitly discuss when not to use it or mention alternatives. For example, it doesn't suggest checking leave balance first with get_employee_leave_balance. Context is clear but not explicit.

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