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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description meaningfully adds that opening hours are in Paris time, that prices vary by category, and — most valuably — that fields prefixed 'untrusted*' are operator-written text, a genuine data-provenance disclosure beyond structured fields.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence opens with the core purpose and then lists return fields; nearly every element earns its place given the absence of an output schema. It is dense and slightly run-on but not padded.

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 no output schema, the description appropriately compensates by enumerating return fields, timezone, price-category dependency, and untrusted-field provenance. The main gap is absent guidance on behavior when a slug is invalid or not found.

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 centerSlug parameter, and the schema itself already explains its format and where to obtain it (find_centers/search_available_slots). The description adds nothing about the parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 verb+resource ('Details of one centre') and then enumerates exactly what is returned: address, phone, hours, closures, payment methods, parking, open/bookable status, and price categories. The singular 'one centre' implicitly contrasts with the discovery sibling find_centers, so an agent can distinguish it at a glance.

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 name and 'one centre' framing suggest a detail lookup after obtaining a slug, but the description never says when to use this versus find_centers or search_available_slots, nor any prerequisites. No exclusions or alternatives are stated.

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