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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so 'Read-only' is redundant rather than additive. The genuinely useful disclosure is 'Not a live calendar' plus 'the shop confirms every request', which tells the agent the data comes from policy, may not reflect real-time state, and that availability is not a commitment.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with what is returned before the caveats, with no filler. The 'Read-only' sentence earns nothing since the annotation already states it, so it is one sentence of waste in an otherwise tight definition.

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 tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient: it covers scope, data provenance, and the confirmation caveat. It stops short of hinting at the shape of the returned windows, which would help an agent plan the next call.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single 'days' parameter (1–14 with min/max), so the schema already carries the semantics. The description's 'next N days' adds a marginal restatement and no format, default, or boundary nuance 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?

States a specific resource ('open drop-off windows') with a bounded scope ('next N days from the shop booking policy'), which is clearly distinct from siblings like request_booking, request_quote, or get_status. An agent can tell what it retrieves without opening the schema.

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?

Usage is only implied: the agent can infer this is a pre-booking availability lookup, and 'the shop confirms every request' hints it is advisory rather than transactional. However, no sibling (e.g. request_booking) is named and there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement.

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