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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint annotations, it adds valuable behavioral details: other-organization appointments are deliberately reported as not found, and it explicitly lists excluded data (notes, reminders, contact details, organization data, payment data) and the 50-service cap. These are material traits an agent could not infer from annotations alone.

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 purposeful sentences with the core fetch action and id source front-loaded. Each sentence contributes distinct information: return fields, exclusions, and cross-organization not-found behavior; there is no filler.

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?

For a single-parameter read operation with a full output schema and safety annotations, the description covers the remaining operational details an agent needs. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation or interpretation.

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 100%, so the schema already documents appointmentId as a 24-lowercase-hex id returned by list_appointments. The description reinforces that provenance but adds no new format, constraints, or default semantics beyond the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('one tenant-scoped HairDora appointment') and ties the id to list_appointments, clearly distinguishing it from the list/get siblings. It further narrows the tool's scope by naming the returned fields.

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?

It establishes that the id must come from list_appointments, implicitly telling an agent when this tool applies: after obtaining an appointment id from the list call. It does not explicitly spell out 'use this instead of list_appointments when you need one appointment's details,' but the sibling context makes that obvious.

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