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

With annotations already declaring readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, the description adds real domain semantics: inquiries and requests do not block the time (space still looks open), whereas accepted bookings do. It also discloses the auth requirement (Cotlet API key with access to this app), which the annotations do not cover.

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 sentence and the second sentence both enumerate "inquiries, requests and bookings for one space," which is redundant. The remaining sentences (blocking behavior, usage, auth) each earn their place, but the duplicated enumeration dilutes front-loading.

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 read-only, openWorld calendar fetch with no output schema, the description covers what is returned, the key behavioral distinction (which items block time), when to consult it, and the auth prerequisite. Nothing essential to calling it correctly is missing.

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%, so space_id, from and to are already documented. The description only restates the "one space between two dates" framing with no added format, constraints, or edge-case guidance, 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 and resource (get calendar) scoped to one space over a date range, then lists exactly what it returns: inquiries, requests and bookings. This distinguishes it from siblings like peerspace_list_bookings or peerspace_get_booking, which cover only bookings, without requiring the agent to open 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?

"Check it before you accept a request" gives a concrete when-to-use trigger tied to the accept_booking_request workflow. It stops short of naming alternative tools explicitly, so it is clear context rather than full when-not/alternatives guidance.

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