monthly_attendance

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, which is consistent with the description's 'report' wording. The description adds parameter details but does not disclose behavioral traits such as rate limits, data freshness, or result size beyond pagination. No contradictions.

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 with a clear one-line summary followed by a bulleted list of parameters. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy. Front-loaded with the key purpose.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should explain the return format (e.g., fields in the report). It only states 'Monthly attendance report' without details on columns, totals, or handling of missing data. This leaves the agent uncertain about what data to expect.

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 description explains all parameters (year, month, office_id with fallback, employee_name as substring filter, status meaning, pagination). Since schema description coverage is 0%, this significantly adds meaning. Could elaborate on possible status values beyond '1 = active'.

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 it returns a 'Monthly attendance report for an office,' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like daily_attendance_summary and monthly_overtime_report by specifying monthly and office scope, but does not explicitly differentiate from all siblings.

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 implicit usage guidelines via parameter defaults (e.g., office_id falls back to env variable) and pagination options, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like late_report or leave_balance_report.

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