leveringstider

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds that prices accompany the slots and that results are advisory only, which is useful context beyond the annotations, but says nothing about how many slots come back, for which store, or how the defaults (5 days, 'nemlig') shape the result.

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, front-loaded with the resource and closed with the usage caveat; no filler. It is terse to the point of under-specification, but nothing is redundant.

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 tool with no output schema and 0% schema description coverage, the definition should explain what a returned slot looks like (time window, price, availability) and what the two parameters do. It leaves both gaps open, so an agent can call it but cannot reason about the arguments or the response.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it does not: neither 'dage' (days ahead) nor 'butik' (store) is mentioned or explained. Only an indirect hint exists ('leveringstider' implies a time window), leaving an agent to guess what the integer and the store string control.

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 names the resource precisely: available delivery slots together with price ('Ledige leveringstider med pris'), which is distinct from the cart, order and search siblings. It lacks an explicit verb (list/hent), so the agent must infer that it is a retrieval tool, and it does not explicitly contrast itself with any sibling.

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?

'Kun til orientering: brugeren selv vælger tiden' gives a real usage constraint – present the slots but let the user make the choice. However, it does not say when to call this versus the order/cart siblings, nor whether it should be called before or after items are in the cart.

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