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

Far exceeds the annotations: it discloses that priced seats charge the payment method, that the seat appears on the e-ticket and trip, that confirmation is on by default and can be toggled, that the action reaches other people requiring user confirmation, and the auth requirement. This is rich mutation context while remaining consistent with readOnlyHint=false.

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-loads what the tool does and the source of the seat, then layers constraints. It is slightly dense and the more conversational clauses ('Reaches other people: confirm with the user...') could be tightened, but each sentence carries actionable information.

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 write tool with no output schema, the description covers timing, cost implications, side effects (e-ticket/trip), confirmation policy, and auth, leaving no critical gap for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters, and the description largely maps to those same sources (get_seat_map, list_trips, get_trip). It adds the format hint consistency but no new syntax, so the 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?

States a specific verb (pick/reserve) and resource (seat) with precise scope: one seat, one passenger, one flight. It explicitly distinguishes itself from get_seat_map by naming it as the source rather than the actor, so an agent can route correctly.

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?

Provides a clear precondition ('where the airline offers it'), a timing constraint ('up to 48 hours before departure'), confirmation behavior, and a prerequisite (Cotlet API key). It stops short of naming explicit alternatives, but the context is strong enough to select the tool.

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