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

Annotations already establish this as a safe read (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description adds genuine value beyond them by disclosing the auth requirement ('Needs the user's Cotlet API key with access to this app') and the shape of the returned data (title + services). It omits pagination or result-size behavior.

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 first two sentences are near-duplicates ('Employees of a location with title and the services each one performs' vs 'Lists the employees of one location with their title and the services each performs'), wasting the most prominent position. The trailing usage and auth sentences do earn their place.

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 simple read-only single-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, downstream use, and the API-key prerequisite. Complete enough to call correctly, with only return formatting/pagination left unspecified.

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 the single location_id parameter is fully documented, including its default. The description only implies location scoping ('one location') and never names location_id or adds format details, so it adds little beyond the schema. 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 and resource ('Lists the employees of one location') and even names the returned fields (title and services each performs). It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like meevo_list_services or meevo_list_locations.

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?

Gives concrete context by explaining that the resulting staff_id narrows meevo_list_appointments and meevo_find_open_slots, or is used to book a specific employee. This is clear usage context, though it never states when to prefer this tool over other list_* siblings.

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