calendar_find_availability

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

The description adds meaningful behavior beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by specifying which event types block availability and that unknown or incomplete data yields no slots. It is consistent with the read-only and open-world 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?

The description is compact and information-dense, using two sentences to convey the core operation, blocking rules, and failure behavior. There is no redundant or extraneous content.

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?

The description covers important behavioral edge cases and UTC scope, but because there is no output schema, it does not clarify the exact return shape or how slots are represented. An agent may still need to infer result structure.

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 very low; only nested calendarId has a description. The tool description does not explain key parameters like start, end, durationMinutes, maxSlots, or stepMinutes beyond their names and schema constraints.

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 tool's purpose: finding common UTC availability slots across explicitly specified accounts/calendars. It also names the resource type and distinguishes the operation from calendar listing/creation by focusing on availability computation.

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 explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus sibling alternatives like calendar_free_busy or calendar_list_events. The description says what it does but not when an agent should prefer it over related tools.

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