get_next_available_dateEarliest free slot for a service variant, scanning up to 90 days ahead. Use when get_available_slots comes back empty.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| clinic_slug | Yes | The clinic slug from search_clinics (the URL segment, e.g. "mickes-klinik-lund"). | |
| service_variant_id | Yes | A bookable service variant id from list_clinic_services. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true. Description adds behavioral detail about scanning up to 90 days ahead, which is not in annotations. No contradictions, but could mention return format or error handling.
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 sentences, no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, making it immediately clear what the tool does.
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 two well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, usage scenario, and a key behavioral constraint (90-day scan). Could mention return value format, but not essential.
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 coverage is 100% and both parameters have descriptions in the schema. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 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?
Description clearly states it finds the earliest free slot for a service variant, scanning up to 90 days ahead. It distinguishes itself from sibling tool 'get_available_slots' by explicitly stating when to use it.
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?
Explicitly says 'Use when get_available_slots comes back empty,' providing clear, actionable guidance on when this tool is appropriate instead of alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: searching clinics, listing services, getting available slots, and finding the next available date. No overlap in functionality.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., search_clinics, list_clinic_services, get_available_slots). No mixing of conventions.
With 4 tools, the server is well-scoped for clinic discovery and appointment slot checking. No unnecessary clutter or missing essentials.
The tool set fully covers the discovery workflow: find clinics, see their services, check availability, and handle empty slots with next available date. The server explicitly excludes booking, so no gap.