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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It reveals that returned slots may vary in availability and instructs the agent to surface only those with available: true, and 'List' conveys a read-only operation. However, it omits return format, ordering, timezone handling, and error behavior.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the tool's core purpose. The second sentence adds actionable filtering guidance, though it is slightly customer-facing rather than a pure API behavior note.

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 three-parameter list operation with no output schema, the description gives a basic but incomplete picture. It fails to explain the slug parameter or describe the slot response fields beyond the available flag, leaving an agent to guess at the output shape.

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 only 33%, so the description should compensate, but it mostly restates date and party_size without adding meaning. The slug parameter is entirely unexplained, and party_size gets no semantics beyond the schema's minimum of 1.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('bookable time slots for a business') and names the two key inputs, date and party size. It doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings like create_booking or search, but the function is unambiguous from the wording.

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 an availability-checking use case but provides no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and does not route the agent away from related tools such as search, get_business, or create_booking.

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