batman_get_unavailabilities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'list unavailabilities' without disclosing whether it returns all unavailabilities, supports filtering by developerId, requires authentication, or any other behavioral details. This is a significant gap for a tool that likely has optional filtering.

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 concise phrase, front-loaded and free of unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for a simple action, though it sacrifices detail 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?

Given the low complexity (1 optional parameter, no output schema), a short description can be acceptable, but this one lacks any context about what an unavailability is, how the optional developerId changes behavior, or what the response contains. It is incomplete for an agent to safely invoke the tool.

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 has one optional parameter developerId, but the description gives no explanation of its meaning or effect. With 0% schema description coverage, the description completely fails to clarify parameter semantics, leaving the agent to guess.

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 'Listar indisponibilidades' clearly identifies the action (list) and resource (unavailabilities), making the basic purpose understandable. However, it lacks explicit differentiation from sibling tools like batman_get_developers or batman_get_history, so it does not fully distinguish itself.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention of prerequisites or context. The description simply states the action without any usage direction.

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