search_slots

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing key behavioral traits: it returns 'real production inventory' from 19 specific suppliers, uses 'live' sourcing via OCTO protocol, sorts by urgency (soonest first), and explains result sorting logic. It doesn't mention rate limits or authentication requirements, but provides substantial operational 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?

The description is efficiently structured with purpose statement, supplier list, sorting explanation, parameter documentation, and return format - all in appropriate detail. Every sentence adds value, and it's well-organized with clear sections for Args and Returns.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, no annotations, but has output schema), the description is remarkably complete. It covers purpose, behavioral context, detailed parameter semantics, and explains the return format. With an output schema present, it appropriately doesn't need to detail return value structure.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing detailed semantics for all 5 parameters: explains city accepts partial matches and can be empty, specifies category should be 'experiences' for tours/activities, clarifies hours_ahead default and meaning, explains max_price=0 means all prices, and provides nuanced guidance on limit usage with sorting implications.

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 tool searches for 'last-minute available tours and activities' with specific details about real inventory from 19 suppliers via OCTO protocol. It distinguishes from siblings like book_slot (booking) and get_booking_status (status checking) by focusing on search functionality.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (searching for last-minute tours/activities) and includes practical guidance like 'Use city/category filters to narrow results instead of raising the limit when possible.' However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives among sibling tools.

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