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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, openWorld). The description adds genuinely useful behavior: earliest-first ordering, default range semantics, the two data sources, and the auth requirement (Cotlet API key with app access). It omits pagination/return-shape detail, but the added context is substantial.

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 and readable, but mildly redundant: the date-range scope is stated twice (opening clause and the "Lists sessions ... in a date range" clause). Each sentence carries content, yet the repetition costs some efficiency.

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 list tool whose safety profile is carried by annotations and with no output schema, the description covers fields, ordering, defaults, sources and auth. What remains missing, pagination and result limits, is minor.

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 itself documents from/to with their formats and defaults. The description's "without dates it covers the coming days from today" synthesizes the combined default range but adds no new syntax beyond the schema. 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 (list) and resource (sessions) with clear scope (booked sessions in a date range), and enumerates the returned fields (client, session type, time). It further distinguishes the two session sources, clients-booked vs self-added, so an agent understands exactly what is retrieved.

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 clear context for use: a date-parameterized listing from Studio Manager, with explicit default behavior when dates are omitted. It does not name alternative session-related tools or explicitly state when not to use it, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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