find_meeting_times

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

No annotations, so description carries full burden. It explains that it analyzes calendars and returns ranked options with timestamps, implying read-only behavior. However, it does not explicitly state it does not modify data, nor does it mention error handling or limitations.

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 concise sentences: first states core purpose, second adds output usage guideline. No redundant or extraneous information, every sentence adds value.

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?

With 4 parameters, a nested preferences object, and no output schema, the description covers purpose and output format but lacks details on behavior (e.g., ranking logic, no-slot handling, error conditions). Completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so schema already details all parameters. The description adds no additional parameter-level information beyond schema, earning the baseline score of 3 for high coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool finds available meeting time slots that work for all attendees, using specific verbs and resource. It distinguishes from siblings: check_calendar_availability likely checks a single slot, and create_calendar_event creates an event, while this tool focuses on finding times.

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?

Provides guidance on using the output timestamps for event creation, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings or when not to use it. Implicitly, it is for finding slots before creating events, but lacks explicit context.

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