restaurant_vacancy

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden but only implies a read via 'Get'. It doesn't say whether status is real-time or cached, whether it requires the restaurant to be in a reservation network, or whether unavailable restaurants error out or return an empty result.

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?

One tight, front-loaded sentence with no redundancy. It is efficient, though the brevity contributes to the missing behavioral detail rather than compensating for it.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves key questions unanswered: how many days 'next few days' covers, what the vacancy status values look like, and granularity (per-slot vs per-day). The agent has no structured fields to fall back on.

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 0% and the single parameter restaurant_id is undocumented in both schema and description. It doesn't explain how to obtain an ID (e.g., from search_restaurants) or what format is expected beyond the integer type.

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?

A specific verb ('Get') and resource ('vacancy status') scoped to a restaurant and a near-term horizon. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like restaurant_detail, restaurant_menu, and restaurant_photos, though the differentiation is implicit rather than stated.

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?

No guidance on when this tool is preferred over restaurant_detail or search_restaurants, and no prerequisites mentioned. The agent must infer that this is for checking availability, and there is no hint whether restaurant_detail already returns vacancy data.

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