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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail: it returns at most fourteen opening-hour rows and explicitly excludes many field categories, which helps set response expectations beyond the 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?

Three concise sentences deliver the core purpose, the return contents, and the exclusions without filler. Key scoping information is front-loaded, making the description easy to scan and act on.

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 a simple single-parameter schema, rich annotations, and an output schema present, the description is sufficient for correct invocation. It adds important constraints like the maximum number of opening-hour rows and the full exclusion list, completing the context needed to set expectations.

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?

The schema already documents gymId as an owned GymFlexa gym id with a regex pattern, giving 100% schema description coverage. The description does not add new parameter meaning beyond reinforcing that the gym is tenant-owned, so the baseline score 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 states a specific verb and resource: getting the safe scheduling configuration for one tenant-owned GymFlexa gym. It also lists the exact returned fields and explicitly names what it excludes, which clearly differentiates it from siblings like get_gym_payment_summary or get_gym_availability.

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 implies usage by focusing on scheduling configuration and excluding other domains like payment, billing, and members, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus a sibling or when to avoid it. The scoping is clear enough for inference, but no alternative tools are named.

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