feishu_get_free_busy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are required, how the busy status is computed, whether it includes all-day events, or what the response format looks like. The description is devoid of any behavioral context beyond the vague purpose.

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 extremely concise (a single bilingual phrase), but it is under-specified rather than efficient. It front-loads the core purpose but lacks any supporting detail that would make it useful. For a tool description, being this short without adding value is a weakness, not a strength.

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 that this is a read tool with no annotations, no output schema, and three required parameters, the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain what the tool returns, whether it aggregates over multiple calendars, how it handles time zones, or any operational constraints. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is provided.

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 100%, so all three parameters are already well-documented in the schema (calendar_ids, start_time, end_time with types and units). The description adds no additional parameter information, but because the schema is complete, a baseline 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 is essentially a translation of the tool name: 'feishu_get_free_busy' -> '查询用户忙碌状态' (query user busy status). It restates the name in Chinese and English but adds no specificity, such as what 'busy status' means in output, whether it returns intervals, or how it differs from the sibling feishu_get_available_time. This is tautological and fails to distinguish it from siblings.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like feishu_get_available_time or feishu_get_event_list. It does not state any conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage entirely from the name.

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