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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations: nothing is persisted until confirm_action is called with the returned action_id, a preview is returned, times default to Europe/Madrid, and a linked account with the agent's CRM permissions is required. These are real behavioral constraints (write staging, auth model, timezone semantics) that the readOnly/destructive/idempotent hints cannot convey.

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 with the core action and the staged-write caveat, then layered caveats (MLS, timezone, account requirement). Each sentence carries real information, though the prose form is drier and slightly longer than strictly necessary.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values (preview and action_id) need no further explanation. Combined with the account requirement, timezone default, and confirm workflow, an agent has everything needed to invoke this correctly in sequence with confirm_action.

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 only 60%, and the description compensates by explaining that property_reference may be the agency's own or a shared MLS listing and by clarifying timezone handling for starts_at. It leaves duration_minutes and notes unmentioned, so it adds meaningful but not complete parameter context.

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 ('Stage a viewing in the agent's own CRM diary') plus the scope ('with the client and the listing on it'), and flags the two-phase nature vs. confirm_action. An agent can distinguish this from sibling tools like confirm_action, cancel_action, and submit_enquiry from the text alone.

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?

Clearly gives the workflow context: stage now, then call confirm_action after the agent agrees, and notes that MLS listings are not contacted. It also states the prerequisite (linked PropertyList account). No explicit when-not guidance or alternative-tool routing beyond confirm_action, so it stops just short of a 5.

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