find_meeting_time

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

No annotations provided, but the description discloses the API used, default parameters, and the format of results. It implies a read-only operation with no destructive effects, which is sufficient for this search tool.

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 well-structured with an Args section, and each sentence adds value. It is appropriately sized given the parameter count, though slightly verbose in listing defaults.

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?

Has an output schema, so return values are documented. Description explains both input and output structure, including free_slots keyed by date with start/end/duration. Completely covers the tool's behavior.

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%, but the description adds meaning to all parameters: explains comma-separated emails, date format, defaults for end_date, duration_minutes, start_hour, end_hour. This compensates for missing 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 finds meeting times that work for multiple people, using a specific API (OWA GetUserAvailability). It distinguishes from siblings like find_free_time (likely single person) and create_meeting (creation vs finding).

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 explains that it checks cross-mailbox availability and searches each weekday, with defaults provided. It does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, but the context is clear for scheduling group meetings.

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