opentable_find_slots

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so no need to reiterate. The description adds key behavioral context: tokens expire quickly, slots have attributes and types, and the dining-area id is resolved at book time. This enhances understanding beyond the structured field.

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 three sentences plus a parenthetical note, all front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value, explaining the token, attributes, and booking workflow without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters and no output schema, the description explains what each returned slot contains (reservation_token, attributes, type) and how to use it for booking. It lacks explicit detail about other possible response fields, but the coverage is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's role in the booking flow.

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 60%, but the description adds meaningful context for the 'time' parameter (anchor time) and 'database_region' parameter (sharded database limitation and necessity for non-NA bookings). This compensates for missing schema descriptions and clarifies parameter usage.

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 available reservation slots with specific verb ('List'), resource ('available reservation slots'), and context (restaurant, date, party size). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like opentable_book and opentable_search_restaurants by explaining the slot's purpose and how it feeds into booking.

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?

The description provides clear guidance on using the returned reservation_token for booking and notes that a separate opentable_get_restaurant call isn't needed. It implies the tool is a prerequisite for booking but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives, though the context is adequate.

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