Available consultation slots (IST) with the Printing Labs team for a given date. Use before book-meeting; slots reflect the live calendar.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| date | Yes | Date in YYYY-MM-DD format (today to +60 days, IST) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds valuable context by noting that slots reflect the live calendar, implying real-time data freshness. While it doesn't explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe return format, the verb 'get' and the context strongly imply a non-mutating lookup, and the description is transparent enough for a simple read tool.
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 a single, well-crafted sentence that packs the essential information: purpose, team, time zone, and usage context. It is front-loaded with the core function and avoids redundancy, making it highly efficient.
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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the key aspects: what it does, when to use it, and that it provides live data. It doesn't detail the return structure, but the name and description imply a list of slots, and the siblings context (book-meeting) helps the agent infer its purpose. This is sufficient for the tool's simplicity.
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?
The input schema already provides a comprehensive description of the 'date' parameter, including format and range (today to +60 days, IST). The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond a generic 'for a given date', so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate since schema coverage is 100%.
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 clearly states the tool's function: retrieving available consultation slots with the Printing Labs team for a given date. It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('meeting slots'), and mentions the team context, distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'book-meeting' which handles booking.
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?
It explicitly instructs to 'Use before book-meeting', providing a clear directive on when to use this tool relative to its sibling. The context that 'slots reflect the live calendar' reinforces its role as a pre-booking check, making the usage guidance precise and actionable.
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 targets a distinct action or resource: product discovery vs pricing vs orders vs meetings vs support. While get-company-info, get-site-info, and get-guide all provide reference material, their scopes are clearly separated (verified facts vs FAQ/how-it-works vs published articles). No two tools appear to do the same thing.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: book-, cancel-, reschedule-, get-, search-, list-, request-, track-, reorder-, create-. Even exceptions like my-orders and my-invoices fit a possessive pattern that is predictable. No mixed conventions or vague verbs.
24 tools is on the high end but appropriate for the breadth of this server's scope: product catalog, pricing, meetings, orders, invoices, support, guides, company info, and SEO. Each tool fills a specific niche, and none feel redundant. It is slightly heavy but not overwhelming for the domain.
The tool surface covers the core workflows well: product search/details/pricing, meeting booking/cancel/reschedule, order viewing/tracking/reordering, quotes, complaints, callbacks, invoices, guides, and company information. A minor gap is the absence of a direct 'place new order' tool, but request-quote and reorder handle the necessary paths, and other interactions (e.g., complains) have clear entry points.
