create_calendar_availability

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

Without annotations, the description partially conveys behavior via the [mutation] tag and rule type list, but it omits important details such as side effects, validation rules, or constraints (e.g., mutually exclusive parameters for different rule types).

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 concise, front-loading the action and resource, and includes parenthetical rule types and a [mutation] tag. It could be more structured but avoids unnecessary clutter.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is inadequate. It lacks details on return values, error handling, and how rule type affects required fields, leaving significant gaps for correct invocation.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% with brief descriptions. The tool description adds no further semantic value beyond the schema, failing to explain parameter relationships (e.g., day_of_week required for weekly, specific_date for date_exception). Baseline 3 is appropriate due to high coverage.

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 (create) and resource (availability rule in a calendar), listing rule types (weekly, date exception, blocked) to distinguish from sibling tools like create_calendar_event. However, it does not explicitly contrast with similar creation tools, preventing a perfect score.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update_calendar_availability, create_calendar_event), nor does it mention prerequisites like the need for an existing calendar.

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