get_calendar

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It adds valuable context by explaining that price null means unknown and instructs not to invent a rate, and it discloses that nested reservations are denylist-stripped. This goes beyond basic retrieval semantics, though it stops short of covering auth, errors, or pagination.

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 endpoint, then provides essential response semantics in three focused sentences. No sentence is redundant; each adds either scope, field meaning, or a critical caveat.

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 there is no output schema, the description does a good job of explaining the key return values: per-day status, isAvailable, price, and reservation stripping. It could be more complete by covering response structure, date range inclusivity, or authentication, but the core information an agent needs to interpret results is present.

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 67%, so the schema already documents startDate and endDate formats. The description adds path context for listingId via the endpoint template, but it does not meaningfully expand on the meaning or constraints of the date parameters beyond what the schema provides.

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 action ('Retrieve listing calendar') and the specific resource, including the endpoint and query parameter. It is distinct from sibling tools like get_listing and list_reservations, though it does not explicitly name or contrast itself with them.

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 the tool is used for viewing daily availability and pricing, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as list_reservations or get_listing. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or use-case conditions stated.

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