check_availabilityList bookable slots. Optionally narrow with an ISO date or datetime range, and pass the buyer's IANA timezone to get their local times alongside the seller's.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| to | No | ISO date or datetime, e.g. 2026-08-17 | |
| from | No | ISO date or datetime, e.g. 2026-08-10 | |
| limit | No | ||
| timezone | No | Buyer's IANA timezone, e.g. Europe/London, for a second set of times |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations readOnlyHint=true already indicate a safe read operation, and the description adds useful behavioral context: the timezone parameter results in displaying the buyer's local times alongside the seller's. It also clarifies that date range filtering is optional. No contradiction with annotations.
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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and then adding optional filters. Every word adds value; no redundant or filler text.
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 availability-list tool with rich annotations and schema, the description covers the core behavior, optional filters, and the timezone feature. It doesn't describe the exact return format or pagination, but with no output schema and a simple use case, the level of detail is sufficient.
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 75% (3 of 4 parameters described). The description adds meaning beyond the schema by clarifying the 'timezone' param produces local times alongside the seller's, and that to/from accept ISO date/datetime ranges. The 'limit' param has no description but is constrained by schema (max 100, >0).
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 opens with the specific verb-resource pair 'List bookable slots,' clearly identifying the tool's function. The mention of narrowing by date/datetime and timezone distinguishes it from sibling tools that manage bookings, orders, and certificates.
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 explicitly states the primary use case ('List bookable slots') and how to optionally narrow results with date ranges and timezone. It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use the tool or alternatives, but there are no close alternatives among the siblings, so the guidance is adequate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, especially the session booking lifecycle and certificate operations. However, the four deprecated aliases (cancel_booking, get_booking, reschedule_booking, update_booking) perform exactly the same actions as their new counterparts, creating potential confusion despite the deprecation notices.
Newer tools follow a verb_noun pattern (create_order, cancel_order, get_order_details, reschedule_session), but the use of 'order' vs 'session' is inconsistent, and 'order_certificate' uses 'order' as a verb. The deprecated aliases mixing 'booking' with 'order' further muddies the convention, making the overall naming only moderately predictable.
At 16 tools the set feels slightly heavy, but four are deprecated aliases that are exact duplicates of active tools. The effective 12 unique tools are well-scoped for a shop handling both session bookings and certificate purchases, so the count is reasonable.
The session booking lifecycle is fully covered (availability, create, cancel, reschedule, update, status, details) and certificate operations (order, transfer, renounce) are present. Minor gaps exist, such as no way to list all orders or verify a certificate, but these are not critical to the core workflows.