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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: the auth requirement (Cotlet API key with access to this app) and the default 30-day range. It does not describe pagination or result size, keeping it short of a 5.

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-loads the resource and payload, then the usage rule, then auth. Slightly redundant: the first sentence ('open and closed dates and the quota per day and time') is largely restated in the second. Still efficient overall.

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 read-only calendar tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned, the default date window, the auth prerequisite, and how it fits with sibling mutation tools. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 activity_id, from, and to are already documented with formats and defaults. The description restates the 30-day default range but adds no new syntax or meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter burden.

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+resource (get availability = calendar of an activity), and spells out what the payload contains: open/closed dates and quota per day and start time. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like open_dates, close_dates, and list_activities. An agent can tell what it returns without opening any 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?

Explicitly says to use it 'before and after close_dates or set_quota to check the result,' naming the alternative tools and the condition that selects this one. That is a genuine when/when-not routing statement rather than implied usage.

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