tock_get_availability

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description reveals important behavioral details: Tock returns the full open-date/time set by default, passing a date only focuses the summary, and no booking side effect occurs. The external reservation redirect adds practical context.

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?

Three sentences carry distinct, high-value information: what the tool returns, how the date parameter behaves, and the non-booking caveat. There is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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 availability tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains the return contents, the date behavior, and the reservation limitation. The party_size parameter is already fully described in the schema, 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning for the date parameter by explaining how it affects the output ('focus the summary') while noting the full set is still returned. This goes beyond the schema's simple 'center the calendar on' wording.

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-object pair ('Get a venue's bookable calendar') and enumerates the returned content: experiences, prices, party sizes, cancellation policy, and open dates/times. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like tock_get_restaurant or tock_list_reservations.

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?

It explains when the optional date parameter is useful ('pass a date to focus the summary') and explicitly warns that this MCP does not book, directing the agent to exploretock.com for reservations. It does not explicitly compare against sibling tools, but the usage context is clear.

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