bitrix_find_free_slot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly states the operation is read-only, creates nothing, returns at most maxCandidates slots, uses a specific output format, and requires the calendar scope. It does not cover timezone handling or result ordering, but the core side-effect and access requirements are transparent.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose and safety, return format and downstream compatibility, and required access scope. The most important information is front-loaded.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description adequately covers return shape, format, result cap, side effects, and permission requirements. Parameter details are fully handled by the schema. Minor gaps such as timezone behavior and exact output structure could improve completeness, but nothing critical is missing.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds marginal semantic value by mentioning maxCandidates and connecting the output format to bitrix_schedule_meeting's from/to fields, but most parameter meaning is already fully documented in the schema.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: finding a common free calendar slot for multiple participants. It clearly distinguishes itself from bitrix_schedule_meeting by framing itself as the read-only availability search that produces the meeting's from/to inputs.

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 a clear workflow: find a free slot first, then pass the returned values to bitrix_schedule_meeting. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives, so it stops short of a perfect 5.

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