Check the status of an existing confirmed booking by its reference (e.g. LDT-2026072062783). Returns the booking status and location. A booking started via start_booking is not confirmed until the person completes payment on the website.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| booking_reference | Yes | The booking reference, e.g. "LDT-2026072062783". |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
ReadOnlyHint annotation already indicates no mutation; description adds nuance that the booking must be confirmed (payment done). No contradictions.
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, minimal waste. First sentence states purpose and parameter format, second provides critical usage context.
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?
Adequately covers the simple tool: one parameter, no output schema. Could mention potential return values (status fields) but not necessary given simplicity.
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?
Single parameter has 100% schema coverage. Description only mentions the reference without adding format details beyond the schema example. No extra meaning 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?
Clearly states the verb 'check status' and resource 'existing confirmed booking' with reference format example. Distinguishes from unconfirmed bookings via start_booking context.
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?
Explicitly states the tool is for confirmed bookings and clarifies when a booking is not confirmed (payment not completed). Does not explicitly name alternatives but implies start_booking for incomplete bookings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct action: find offices, check booking status, get pricing, get service info, and start a booking. No overlap in purpose.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., find_offices, get_booking_status).
With 5 tools covering the main booking workflow (search, info, pricing, start, status), the count is well-scoped for the service.
The tools cover the primary booking flow, but lack update or cancel functionality. However, those actions are handled by the person on the website, so the gap is minor.
