get_facility_hours

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'current operating hours' but does not disclose if the data is cached, how fresh it is, or any potential latency. No behavioral traits beyond the basic functionality are mentioned.

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, clear sentence with no extraneous words. Every part contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 the tool has no parameters, no output schema, and simple functionality, the description sufficiently explains what it does. It could potentially mention the format of the hours (e.g., days of week) but is otherwise complete for an agent to understand its 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?

There are no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds value by specifying what the tool returns (hours and status for all facilities), which is beyond the schema. Baseline 4 is appropriate as no parameters need explanation.

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 verb 'Get' and the specific resource: 'current operating hours and open/closed status for all recreation facilities'. This directly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_facility_details' or 'get_recsports_facilities'.

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 indicates it returns hours for 'all recreation facilities', implying a broad listing without filtering. It provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives. For a simple, no-parameter tool, this is adequate but not explicit.

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