crm_propose_meeting_slots

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds no context about potential side effects, data modifications, or what the action does beyond 'propose meeting slots'. The description does not clarify the destructive nature.

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 succinct and directly to the point, with no redundant information. It effectively conveys the core operation in two sentences.

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?

While an output schema exists, the description does not describe what the action returns or any expected outcomes. There are no examples or hints about the response format, making it insufficient for an agent to understand the full context.

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?

The description explains that 'message' is a free-text objective and 'inputs' is an optional JSON string for structured inputs. However, it does not specify what keys or structures are expected for proposing meeting slots, leaving the agent to guess.

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 states that it runs the 'crm domain agent action propose_meeting_slots' and routes through the dispatcher. However, it does not elaborate on what proposing meeting slots entails, relying heavily on the tool name for meaning.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternative scheduling or CRM tools. The description is a generic template and does not mention any prerequisites or conditions for invoking this action.

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