feegow_available_schedule

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

The description mentions HTTP GET, implying read-only behavior. However, it does not explicitly state safety or disclose any potential side effects, rate limits, or return format. Without annotations, the description partially fulfills transparency.

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 very concise, consisting of a single sentence. It efficiently conveys key information, though it could be slightly more 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?

With no output schema and eight parameters, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the output structure or how parameters interact, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to use the tool correctly.

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 50%, but the description only adds meaning for one parameter (tipo) and the date format. The other parameters (unidade_id, procedimento_id, etc.) are not explained, failing to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 lists available appointment schedule times, specifying the date format and tipo parameter. It is specific about the resource and verb, but does not differentiate from the sibling feegow_available_schedule_v2.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like feegow_available_schedule_v2. There are no prerequisites or context for use.

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