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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false). The description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: this is a lookup on an existing reservation and requires both the booking number and the email used to make it, effectively disclosing an identity-verification requirement. It stops short of describing the returned shape.

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?

Two short sentences, nothing wasted, with the core action front-loaded ahead of the input requirements.

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 lookup with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description supplies what an agent needs: what it returns and which two identifiers are required. Return structure is not described but is not strictly required here.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0% and two required parameters, the description compensates well by naming and explaining both: 'le numero de reservation' (booking number) and 'l e-mail du client utilise pour la reservation'. It adds meaning the bare schema does not provide, though no format/type detail is given.

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+resource: it returns the status of an already-made reservation ('Donne l etat d une reservation deja faite'). The phrase 'deja faite' implicitly separates it from the sibling 'reserver', but no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: consult it to check the state of an existing booking, requiring the booking number and customer email. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance nor mention of alternatives such as 'reserver' or 'calculer_prix'.

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