find_available_slots

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Find available schedule slots' clearly indicates a read-only lookup behavior, but it does not disclose what 'available' means, how results are returned, or what happens when no slots match. It is adequate but not rich in behavioral detail.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every phrase contributes to the user's understanding of what the tool does and what inputs matter. This is appropriately concise.

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 six parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is a minimal viable summary. It covers the core operation and criteria, but it does not explain return values or the exact semantics of date/day alternatives and duration matching. It is sufficient for basic selection but not fully complete for invocation confidence.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does add meaning by grouping parameters into categories: schedule type, date/day, time range, and duration. However, it does not explain formats, constraints, or relationships among fromTime, toTime, and duration, leaving some required semantic gaps.

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 ('Find') and resource ('available schedule slots'), and lists the key filtering dimensions: schedule type, date/day, time range, and duration. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_schedule or validate_schedule, which have different purposes.

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 implies that the tool should be used when looking for available slots matching certain criteria, but it provides no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over sibling schedule tools or when not to use it. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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