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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds the GET endpoint and the 7-day range constraint. There is no contradiction, but the description does not disclose behavior like response shape, pagination, or timezone handling beyond what annotations and schema already imply.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core action and resource. The phrase 'High-value booking-slot lookup' is vague filler that does not add meaningful guidance, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

The description covers the essential invocation context: resource identity, date range, and the 7-day span limit. With a complete input schema and readOnly annotation, this is mostly sufficient, though a note on the response contents or differentiation from next_available_time would make it fully complete.

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 the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds little beyond restating the ids and the date range, which are already present in the schema property descriptions.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('bookable appointment slots') scoped to business, practitioner, appointment type, and date range. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like cliniko_list_appointments by focusing on 'bookable' slots rather than booked appointments.

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 implies usage for range-based availability lookup through the date range and 7-day span constraint. However, it does not explicitly mention when to choose this over cliniko_next_available_time or other alternatives, leaving the comparison to inference.

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