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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: that availability is live dispatch data, that days can carry a $25-$50 discount, and that capacity is split morning/afternoon. It stops short of noting limits such as availability not being held until booking.

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?

Front-loaded with the core capability, then workflow placement, then service area — a sensible order with no filler sentences. The geographic enumeration is the only part that runs slightly long, though it serves a real applicability check.

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?

With an output schema present the description need not describe return values, and annotations carry the safety profile; params are fully documented. What remains unstated is minor (e.g., whether availability is a soft hold or how far the discount logic extends), so the definition is nearly complete for a read-only availability lookup.

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% and all three params (zip, address, days_out) are documented in-schema, so baseline 3 applies. The description's 'next two weeks' hints at the days_out default but adds no new syntax or precedence guidance beyond what the schema states.

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?

Specific verb+resource: 'See Sonlight Window Cleaning's real dispatch availability for the next two weeks', and it goes further by naming the exact payload of interest (morning/afternoon capacity, discount days). It is clearly distinguishable from get_quote (pricing) and book_window_cleaning (booking) without opening either 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?

Explicit sequencing: 'Use after get_quote ... before calling book_window_cleaning.' This tells the agent both the prerequisite and the successor tool, and the geographic list doubles as a when-applicable filter.

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