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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds real behavior beyond that: unknown fee/location courses are excluded only when the relevant filter is set, live availability is not checked, and `date` is echoed back with booking-window notes.

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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with scope and value, followed by filter behavior and the availability caveat. No sentence is filler and each adds a distinct constraint.

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 no output schema and no annotations covering permissions, the description carries most of the load and does it well for a 7-param search: scope, optionality, exclusion rules, and the availability caveat are all stated. The undocumented proximity and limit params keep it just short of complete.

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 coverage is only 43% (limit, near_lat, near_lng, radius_mi are undocumented). The description clarifies `date` as informational/echoed and explains the unknown-fee exclusion rule that governs max_fee, but says nothing about the proximity trio or limit, so it only partially compensates.

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+resource ('Search public golf courses') plus scope ('currently NYC metro') and the differentiating payload (official tee-time booking links). It doesn't explicitly name siblings get_course/get_booking_link, but the search-vs-get distinction is inferable from the verb and result description.

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?

'Filters are optional' tells the agent all parameters can be omitted, and 'Does not check live tee-time availability' is an explicit when-not. It never routes the agent to get_course or get_booking_link for detail/booking, which is the remaining gap.

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