get_recordings_unavailable

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must carry the full burden. It states the basic function but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as response format, error conditions, or how 'gaps' are computed relative to parameters. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but without annotations, this is not explicitly conveyed.

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?

A single sentence states exactly what the tool does with no wasted words. The parenthetical adds a helpful synonym for 'unavailable periods' without redundancy.

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 is adequate for a simple read tool with a rich output schema, but it doesn't explain what 'gaps' means in relation to the parameters (e.g., how scale affects granularity, whether gaps are per camera or across all). Since the schema and output schema cover the mechanical details, a terse description is acceptable, though it falls short of being fully self-contained.

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 documentation covers 100% of the parameters with meaningful descriptions, including defaults and formats. The description adds no additional parameter context, but the schema already provides sufficient meaning, so a baseline of 3 is 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?

The description uses a specific verb 'Get' and a clear resource 'time ranges where no recordings are available', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_recordings or get_recording_summary. The parenthetical '(gaps)' immediately clarifies the core concept.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool—when gaps in recordings are needed—but it doesn't explicitly state alternatives or when not to use it. Compared to siblings that retrieve recordings or summaries, this tool is unique in focusing on unavailable periods, but no direct comparison or exclusions are provided.

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