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

The description adds significant context beyond annotations: it explains the process (records enquiry, returns reference+link, person must complete steps), warns that agent cannot act on behalf, and cautions about URLs. This aligns with openWorldHint and provides full behavioral clarity.

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?

The description is concise, structured with a clear main action followed by important caveats. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the key purpose.

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?

Given the tool's purpose (booking initiation), the description covers the essential workflow and constraints. It could mention what happens after the person completes (e.g., confirmation notification), but the core behavior is well explained.

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?

All parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage). The description does not add new parameter-level details beyond the schema, but it reinforces the context for using the parameters (e.g., location, service_type). Baseline 3 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 clearly states it starts a lie detector test booking, records the enquiry, and returns a reference and a booking link. This differentiates it from siblings like find_offices or get_pricing.

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 implicitly tells when to use: to initiate a booking. It provides important usage notes (person must finish themselves, agent cannot sign/pay, avoid embedding contact details in URL). It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the warnings are helpful.

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