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

Goes beyond the annotations by disclosing reversibility ('one more call undoes it'), the two things it deliberately leaves untouched, and the auth requirement (Cotlet API key with app access). This is meaningful context for a mutation tool whose annotations only supply destructiveHint=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-loaded and short, but the second sentence ('Replaces the cleaners on one appointment') simply restates the first, and 'so it does not ask for your OK' is an awkward way to express reversibility. It could lose a sentence without losing 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 2-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers scope, side effects, reversibility, and authentication. Only the return shape and any failure/conflict behavior are unaddressed, which are minor given the task.

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 both parameters point at their source listing tools (list_cleaners, list_appointments). The description adds only the 'cleaners or team' nuance for cleaner_ids, so the schema is doing the heavy lifting — baseline 3.

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 ('Set the cleaners or team on one appointment, replacing the current ones') and makes the mutation semantics explicit. An agent can distinguish this from zenmaid_cancel_appointment or zenmaid_reschedule_appointment without opening a 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?

Gives clear scoping context: it acts on a single appointment, replaces current cleaners, does not deactivate a cleaner, and does not touch the default cleaner of a recurring service. It stops short of naming explicit alternative tools or a 'when not to use' rule, but the boundary conditions are well defined.

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