Query Freebusy

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and idempotent, but the description adds no further behavioral context—no limits, error conditions, or notes on time zone handling. It is purely a return-type statement, adding no value beyond the annotations.

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?

A single concise sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized and to the point, clearly stating the tool's core function without unnecessary verbosity.

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 presence of an output schema and highly descriptive input schema, the description is minimally sufficient. It identifies the action and resource, and the phrase 'set of calendars' implies support for multiple calendars. No critical context appears to be missing for basic usage.

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 input schema provides comprehensive descriptions for all six parameters, including examples, defaults, and validation details. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Returns') and resource ('free/busy information') for 'a set of calendars'. It clearly identifies the tool's function and differentiates it from sibling tools like get_events or list_calendars by focusing on free/busy availability rather than event details.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_events or list_calendars. The description simply states what it returns, leaving usage context implicit and not offering any exclusions or prerequisites.

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