easytable_list_dates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint true, and the description does not contradict this. It adds that results include ISO dates and availability, providing some behavioral context beyond the annotation, but does not elaborate on other behaviors like pagination or error conditions.

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 short sentences that convey the core purpose and result format with no unnecessary words. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

For a straightforward listing tool with readOnly annotations and a simple response (dates with availability), the description is largely sufficient. It lacks output format details but the response is adequately implied.

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?

With 75% schema coverage, the description adds no additional meaning to the parameters beyond what is in the schema. The baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents most parameters, but the description does not enhance understanding.

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 the tool lists bookable dates for a specific restaurant area and party size, and mentions each result includes ISO date and availability. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_times or list_types.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. While the context suggests it's used after obtaining area IDs from easytable_list_types, the description does not state this or provide any when-not-to-use conditions.

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