get_freebusy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It discloses that the tool queries data and returns busy slots per calendar, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not mention permissions, rate limits, or the absence of side effects, which are typical for a query tool. The transparency is adequate but not detailed.

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 two sentences with no redundant information. The first sentence states the core action and constraints, and the second adds a key default and return description. Every word adds value, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

The description does not explain the output schema (e.g., structure of busy slots) or the roles of 'account' and 'password'. Given the tool has 5 parameters and no output schema, the description should provide more context to enable correct invocation and result interpretation. It lacks completeness for a non-trivial tool.

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?

The input schema has 5 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description only partially explains 'time_min', 'time_max', and 'calendar_ids' (default and behavior). Parameters 'account' and 'password' are completely undocumented, leaving their purpose unclear. This is insufficient for an agent to correctly populate them.

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 action ('Query busy time ranges'), the resource ('one or more calendars'), and the key parameters ('time_min' and 'time_max' in RFC3339 format). It also mentions the default for calendar_ids and what is returned, making the purpose unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it implies use for checking busy times, it lacks 'when not to use' or comparisons to sibling tools like 'list_events' or 'get_event', leaving the agent without decision support.

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