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

The description largely restates the readOnlyHint annotation ('Read only: it books nothing'), which earns little credit beyond structured fields, though it does add the endpoint POST /v1/online_booking/availability. It discloses nothing about result limits, date-range caps, or whether availability is affected by blocks, staff schedules, or business hours.

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?

Two short sentences with the purpose front-loaded and zero filler; the read-only caveat and endpoint are appended efficiently.

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 six parameters (four required), half the schema undocumented, and no output schema, the description should explain what the optional filters do and what shape 'dates and times' takes. As written, an agent cannot tell how staff_ids or service_ids affect the response or whether a wide date range is permitted.

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 only 50%: business_id, staff_ids, and service_ids have no descriptions, and the tool description supplies no meaning for any of the six parameters. It neither explains that staff_ids/service_ids narrow results nor clarifies the difference between company_id and business_id.

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 and resource — 'Get the dates and times that clients can book online for a location' — so the agent knows this returns bookable availability, not existing bookings. No sibling tool covers availability, so differentiation is implicit rather than stated, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 clause 'Read only: it books nothing' usefully distinguishes this from any booking-creation path, but there is no explicit guidance on when to call this versus list_appointments or get_appointment, nor any stated prerequisites for the required IDs.

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