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

Annotations already mark the tool destructive and non-read-only; the description adds the important side effect that the customer receives an email and that execution is immediate. This goes beyond annotation data, though it leaves out any validation/failure behavior.

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?

Two sentences with no filler, front-loaded with the core action and source of appointmentId. Every phrase earns its place.

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?

With an output schema present, full parameter coverage, and annotations carrying the destructive profile, the description covers the key behavioral context. It could be slightly richer about exclusions or preconditions, but the essentials are present.

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 the baseline is 3. The description's reference to appointmentId from get_bookings is helpful but is duplicated in the schema parameter description, so no additional parameter-level meaning is added.

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 action ('Moves') on a specific resource ('existing booking') and adds the customer email side effect. The mention of appointmentId from get_bookings ties it to the booking lifecycle and separates it from create/cancel.

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 gives clear context: use for moving an existing booking to a new time, which is distinct from create_booking and cancel_booking. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use, so it stops short of a 5.

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