find_meeting_times

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Find meeting slots' and documents the attendees format; it does not explain whether the operation is read-only, what permissions are needed, how availability is computed, what happens with non-respondents, or what the output looks like.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core verb and resource, followed immediately by the most critical parameter format. There is no redundancy or filler, though the very short length means it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 tool with six parameters, three required, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is notably incomplete. An agent is left without guidance on date/time formats, candidate limits, meeting duration, or the meaning of 'is_required', making correct invocation uncertain.

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%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It adds meaning only for 'attendees' (semicolon-separated email addresses); 'start', 'end', 'is_required', 'max_candidates', and 'duration_minutes' are left to inference from their names and defaults, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 states a clear verb and resource ('Find meeting slots') and names the key input (attendees), so an agent can tell it is a meeting-slot search tool. However, it does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings like get_schedule or list_event_instances, and the scope of the search (whose calendars, what time range semantics) is left vague.

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 given about when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as get_schedule, list_event_instances, or list_rooms. The description only states what the tool does, not the conditions that make it the right choice or any exclusions.

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