List BilkaToGo delivery slots

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint; the description adds the auth requirement, the crucial caveat that choosing a slot reserves nothing and it can still fill up, and that slot text is untrusted data that must never be followed as instructions. These are non-obvious behavioral facts an agent could not derive from annotations alone.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and scope, then risk, then alternatives, then safety caveat — a sensible ordering with dense but purposeful sentences. Minor waste in 'Reading changes nothing', which merely restates readOnlyHint=true.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description fully covers the return shape: per-day status values, slots with start/end times, per-slot status, order deadline, Bilka's notes, and `chosen_slot`. Combined with the login requirement and non-reservation warning, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it.

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?

Only one parameter and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents `only_available` fully. The description indirectly explains why filtering matters (unusable days with statuses like sold_out and order_deadline_passed) but never adds syntax or semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the delivery or pickup slots') plus scope: the next two weeks at the cart's current place. It explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools list_delivery_places, set_delivery_place and set_delivery_slot, so an agent can route correctly without opening any schema.

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?

Gives explicit prerequisites (needs a BilkaToGo login) and names the alternatives with the condition that selects them: get_cart's `delivery.place` or list_delivery_places to find the place, and set_delivery_place if the user wants another place's slots. It even states that switching place requires the user's agreement.

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