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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: a result cap of 100 salons and an explicit data-exposure boundary (no client names, contact details or private notes), which is exactly the kind of disclosure an agent cannot infer from 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 sentences, front-loaded with the trigger condition, then the return cap, then the exclusion. Every sentence carries distinct information with no repetition of the name or title.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure need not be described, and the description still supplies the salient result-limit and privacy constraints. For a zero-parameter launcher tool with full annotation coverage, nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly avoids inventing argument behavior that the empty schema does not support.

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 (open HairDora), the resource surface (salons, upcoming appointment previews, service prices, booking availability) and the delivery form (interactive sidebar). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like list_salons or show_salon_overview, which return data rather than launching a UI surface.

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?

Gives a clear trigger ('when someone wants to open HairDora and browse...') and an explicit exclusion ('Not for booking, cancelling or charging for appointments'). It stops short of naming which sibling to use instead for those excluded actions, so it is strong but not fully routing.

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