search_spaces

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

Annotations already flag readOnly and openWorld, so the description is free to add the useful parts: results include booking rules and space ids meant for book_space. It doesn't mention result caps (limit default 40) or what happens when nothing is free, which would have completed the picture.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose, then formats and enum hints in a compact block. Slightly telegraphic and the trailing newline is wasted, but there is no filler.

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?

No output schema and eight parameters, four of which the description explains. Missing guidance on limit, building_id, and min_capacity, plus no indication of result shape or empty-result behavior, leaves real gaps for a multi-parameter search tool.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It does well for date/start/end formats, space_type values, and floor formats, but says nothing about limit, building_id, or min_capacity, leaving three of eight parameters undocumented anywhere.

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 with a scope qualifier ('free for the whole slot') that separates it from get_space and list_locations. The closing line tying output to book_space makes the tool's role in the workflow unmistakable.

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?

Points to list_locations for the space_type list and says results feed book_space, which routes the agent through the booking workflow. It stops short of explicit 'use X instead when...' exclusions against get_space or list_my_bookings, but the practical context is clear.

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