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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure responsibility. It openly states the tool is paused, returns an empty slots list, and provides an explanation. This is a transparent disclosure of the tool's unusual behavior and how to work around 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the critical message about the pause and immediately followed by actionable alternatives. Every word contributes value, no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's unusual paused state, the description is complete: it explains the behavior (empty slots list), the reason (paused), and the exact alternatives to use (las_foretag, avropa_tjanst). Even without an output schema, the agent knows what to expect and how to proceed.

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 has 100% coverage for all four parameters, so the description doesn't need to add parameter details. It adds no parameter-specific information beyond the schema, warranting the baseline score of 3.

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 explicitly states the tool's current behavior: 'Direktbokning är PAUSAD — verktyget svarar med tom slots-lista och en förklaring.' This clearly indicates that the tool is not for booking and returns an empty slots list, distinguishing it from siblings by signaling its inactive status.

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?

The description gives explicit usage guidance: 'Förmedla i stället kontakt: las_foretag ger företagets uppgifter, och avropa_tjanst (utan bekraftad_tid) skickar en förfrågan.' It names alternative tools and explains when to use them, effectively telling the agent to avoid this tool for booking.

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