Find available start times

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered; the description reinforces this ('it changes nothing') and adds the transport detail (POST /availability/intervals/search). It also discloses what a result contains (free resources per interval, group bookings with space), which is behavioral value beyond the annotations.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, then endpoint/read-only context, then the follow-up action. No wasted text, though it is slightly short given the tool's 18-parameter surface.

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 fairly complex query with 18 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, read-only nature, endpoint, and return content well enough to invoke correctly. A brief note on result shape/limits would close the remaining gap.

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 100% across all 18 parameters, including conditional notes such as the parts/duration interaction, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific resource and scope: available start times (intervals) for a service between two dates/times, listing what each result carries (free resources, group bookings with space). It is clear, but it never explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling find_available_dates, so the interval-vs-date choice must be inferred.

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 gives a concrete next step ('Use one of the returned start times with create_reservation'), which is useful downstream guidance. However, it offers no when-not or alternative-tool guidance, so the agent gets no help deciding between this and find_available_dates.

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