年5日取得義務の充足判定

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool returns determination and remaining days, implying a read-only query, but does not explicitly state side effects, authorization needs, or rate limits. The description is adequate but minimal for a check tool.

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 a single, dense sentence that conveys the essential information without fluff. It is front-loaded with the target condition and then states the outputs. However, it could be broken into multiple sentences for readability, but it earns a high score for conciseness.

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 complexity (legal requirement, 6 parameters, no output schema), the description explains the legal basis and what it returns (determination and remaining days), but it does not specify the return format or how parameters interact. With full schema coverage, it is adequate but could be more complete.

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 each parameter has a description. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema; it only gives high-level context about the legal requirement. Thus baseline score 3 is appropriate.

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 purpose: determining if the mandatory five-day paid leave requirement applies and returning the fulfillment status and remaining days. It specifies the target population (workers with 10+ days granted) and cites the relevant law, distinguishing it from siblings like 'check_attendance_rate' or 'calculate_entitlement' by its unique legal focus.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or how it differs from siblings like 'calculate_entitlement' or 'apply_company_policy'. This leaves the agent to infer usage context without explicit instructions.

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