easytable_list_times

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds value by stating the return format ("Times are returned as HH:MM"). It stops there: no note on whether only bookable slots are returned, whether results are paginated, empty-result behavior, or any rate limits for this live availability lookup.

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, front-loaded with the action and scope, and no filler. Both sentences carry information (the second covers the return format), though the phrasing is brief enough to feel thin rather than dense.

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 read-only list tool with a fully enumerated parameter set and no output schema, the description covers purpose and value format adequately. The chain of calls needed to obtain id/type is documented in the schema rather than the description, so 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 80%, so the schema already documents id, date, lang and type (including cross-references to easytable_list_dates and easytable_list_types). The description only loosely maps "restaurant area, date, and party size" onto type/date/persons, adding nothing beyond 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?

Specific verb ("List") plus a precise resource ("available time slots") scoped by restaurant area, date and party size. It is clearly distinct from siblings like easytable_list_dates and easytable_list_types by resource, but the description never names those siblings or the ordering relationship with them.

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 implied by the input dimensions (area/date/party size), so an agent can infer it must gather those first. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no mention of alternatives or prerequisites, so this stays at the minimum-viable level.

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