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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about the nature of the data (owner-created, not reservations), but doesn't disclose details like whether past blocks are included or how the list is ordered. This is acceptable for a read-only list tool.

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 no filler. The core definition is front-loaded, and the clarifying contrast with reservations is concise and valuable.

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 simple read-only list tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could mention whether the list is filtered by date range or includes historical blocks, but the annotations and schema cover the essential safety and parameter details.

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 single optional parameter apartment_id is already fully documented in the schema. The description doesn't add extra meaning about the parameter, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly identifies the resource ('Owner-created blocked date ranges') and distinguishes it from reservations with an explicit contrast ('Not reservations — no guest, no price'). This makes it easy for an agent to understand what list_blocks returns and how it differs from list_reservations.

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 the tool is for viewing owner-created blocks, and the contrast with reservations helps an agent choose it over list_reservations. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is clear enough for a simple list tool.

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