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

Annotations only cover the read-only safety profile, but the description adds substantial non-annotated behavior: the slotToken is signed, expires in ~30 minutes, is the sole booking handle, must be passed unedited, and must not be reused across venues. It also interprets the empty-`times` case and notes the phone-booking fallback for large parties.

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?

Front-loaded purpose in sentence one, sibling routing in sentence two, then the token lifecycle and empty-result meaning. Every sentence carries information an agent needs; nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description correctly compensates by explaining the returned `at` label, the `slotToken`, and the empty-array case. Combined with the 100%-covered input schema and read-only annotations, an agent has everything needed to call and consume this tool.

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 days/from/venue/partySize are already fully documented with formats and constraints. The description reinforces the venue-identity constraint ('never reuse one from a different venue') but adds no syntax or semantics beyond the schema, 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 ('Free table times'), plus the scoping units (one venue, one party size, up to two weeks) that distinguish it from find_appointment_times. An agent can route between the two booking-search siblings purely from this sentence.

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 names the alternative for the wrong vertical ('Use find_appointment_times for a salon or clinic instead') and clarifies that an empty result means closed/fully booked. It stops short of stating prerequisites (e.g. that a venue slug must come from get_venue's ecosystem) and when to prefer book_table over searching.

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