Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
HR-assist MCP server

HR-assist MCP server

by yash-s27
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

apply_leaves

Submit leave requests for employees by providing employee ID and list of leave dates. Returns the application status message.

Instructions

Apply for leaves for the employee
:param emp_id: ID of an employee
:leave_dates : List of leave Dates
:returns : Leave application status message

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "emp_id": "<emp_id>",
      "leave_dates": "<leave_dates>"
    },
    "name": "apply_leaves"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emp_idYes
leave_datesYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. The description only mentions applying leaves and returning a status message, lacking disclosure of side effects, auth needs, or constraints.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short but uses non-standard colon notation for parameters. It could be more structured and formal.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity of leave applications, the description lacks details on date format, error conditions, or approval processes. Output schema exists but doesn't compensate fully.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description adds inline parameter docs ('emp_id: ID of an employee', 'leave_dates: List of leave Dates'), providing meaning beyond the schema's titles and types.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states 'Apply for leaves for the employee' with parameters, clearly indicating the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_employee_leaves and get_leave_history.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives or any prerequisites. Sibling tools for different leave operations exist, so such context would help.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools