find_next_slot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine constraints the annotations do not: only weekday slots are considered, the search is 'earliest'-ordered, and the resource must be free for a contiguous span. It still doesn't say whether weekends/holidays are skipped, what time zone applies, what search horizon is used, or what a miss returns.

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?

A single sentence with the key constraint (earliest, weekday, free, duration) front-loaded and no filler. Nothing in it is redundant with the title or the annotations.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of explaining the return value, and it does not: an agent cannot tell whether it gets a datetime, a start/end pair, or a null/empty on no match. With three required parameters and 33% schema coverage, plus undefined search-horizon and time-zone behavior, the definition is too thin for the tool's actual complexity.

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 33%, with only not_before described; resource_id and hours have no schema descriptions. The description partially compensates by making clear that hours is the required contiguous duration and that the target is a specific resource. It never explains that hours is capped at 24 or that resource_id likely comes from list_resources, leaving real gaps.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it finds the earliest weekday slot where a named resource is free for a required duration. That is far more precise than the bare name. It never contrasts itself with siblings such as schedule_work_order or utilization_report, so an agent must infer the boundary on its own.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'earliest weekday slot' suggests this is the pre-booking lookup you run before schedule_work_order, but that workflow and any exclusions are left unstated. There is no guidance on what to do when no slot is found, or on how far ahead it searches. A one-clause 'use before schedule_work_order' would have moved this to a 4 or 5.

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