get_employee_leaves

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It implies a read operation ('Get') but does not explicitly state safety, idempotency, or any behavioral traits. The return note is confusing ('Remaning or the total number of leaves employee have or left') and lacks clarity.

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 short and to the point, but it is poorly structured with a mix of prose and docstring-style comments. The return note has typos ('Remaning', 'retuns') which detract from clarity. It is concise but not well-organized.

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 tool with one parameter and an existing output schema, the description covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks usage guidance, sibling differentiation, and a clear explanation of the return value. The return note attempts to describe the output but is confusing.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds a docstring for emp_id: 'Id of an employee', which provides basic context beyond the schema's 'Emp Id' property. However, this is minimal and does not explain format or constraints.

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 states 'Get the leave balance of an Employee', which clearly identifies the verb (Get) and resource (leave balance). However, it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling 'get_leave_history', which likely retrieves similar leave data, so it lacks differentiation.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_leave_history' or 'apply_leaves'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it.

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