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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose one useful trait — public holidays are factored into the answer — but it does not say whether a missing date defaults to today, whether omitting 'point' returns both locations' hours, or how a closed day is represented.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler; the location scope and the holiday caveat come before anything else. The phrasing 'including public holidays on a given date' is slightly compressed but still readable.

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 no annotations and no output schema, this definition should explain defaults (date, lang, point omission) and the shape of the returned hours. It leaves all of that to inference, so an agent cannot confidently predict the response.

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 67%: date and lang are documented in the schema, while 'point' has no description. The description partially compensates by naming the two service points, implicitly mapping to the mustamae/haabersti enum values, but it adds nothing about date format, defaults, or combined results.

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 names a specific resource (opening hours) and two specific service points (Mustamäe and Haabersti in Tallinn), plus the holiday nuance, so an agent can tell this apart from siblings like get_prices or get_courier_slots without opening the schema. It stops short of a crisp verb+scope statement, but the resource is unambiguous.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer get_business_info, and no statement about what happens when the optional date or point is omitted. The usage is only inferable from the name and the phrase 'on a given date'; nothing tells the agent the conditions for calling it.

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