Get daily availability

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears the full disclosure burden. It does reveal several behaviors: it limits results to 'working hours,' uses the 'Microsoft 365 calendar' as the data source, and defaults to today. Yet it doesn't disclose the output format, timezone handling, or how working hours are determined, leaving notable gaps.

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, front-loaded with the core action and scope, and contains no filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and default behavior.

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 read-only tool with three optional, well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, and default. However, without annotations or an output schema, it leaves out return-format details and lacks any positioning against the sibling tool, making it only minimally complete for agent use.

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 provides 100% coverage for all parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal parameter-related meaning beyond what the schema already states—only reinforcing 'given day' and 'Defaults to today,' which are already documented on the date parameter.

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 ('Report') and a clear resource ('free and busy time within working hours... based on the Microsoft 365 calendar'), making the tool's function easy to grasp. It implies a distinction from the sibling tool 'get_todays_meetings' by focusing on general daily availability rather than today's meetings, but it doesn't explicitly name the alternative.

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 states it reports availability for 'a given day' and 'Defaults to today,' giving the agent a clear sense of when to use the tool. However, it doesn't provide explicit when-to-use versus when-not-to-use guidance or reference the sibling tool 'get_todays_meetings' as an alternative.

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