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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful substance beyond that: what fields come back (start, end, all-day flag, scope, type) and the notable absence of titles/notes. It does not mention pagination mechanics, though the cursor param implies it.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the usage trigger, followed by return shape and the exclusion. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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?

With 0 required params, a 100%-documented schema, rich annotations and an output schema, the remaining burden on the description is trigger and scope — both supplied. An agent has everything needed to select and call it.

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 100%, so all five parameters (limit, cursor, startTime, endTime, clinicId) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level syntax or defaults beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (list calendar closures/holidays/blocked time) and names the sibling domain it is not for (patient appointments). The title and description together let an agent distinguish it from appointment-related siblings without opening the schema.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger ('Use this when someone asks when their medical practice is closed, or when a doctor or room is blocked...') and an explicit exclusion ('Not for patient appointments'). Both when-to-use and when-not are stated outright.

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