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

The description states the tool creates a service (mutation), which matches annotations (readOnlyHint=false). It mentions setting various fields but does not disclose behaviors like whether requireLogin defaults to true or the effect of requiresConfirmation. Annotations are sparse, so the description carries the burden but provides only high-level behavioral info.

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 sentences front-load the core purpose and a key usage hint. No filler. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) but is concise and readable.

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 tool with 20 parameters and an output schema, the description is minimal. It covers high-level intent but omits important context such as payment handling, staff assignment, or tier restrictions. The output schema may compensate for return values, but the description lacks full contextual coverage.

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 each parameter has individual descriptions. The tool description adds no further semantics beyond grouping fields (duration, price, capacity, policies). Baseline of 3 applies as schema already handles parameter meaning.

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?

Clear verb+resource ('Create a bookable service'). Distinguishes from siblings like update_service and create_service_category by specifying it creates a new service. The description also lists key attributes (duration, price, capacity, policies).

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?

Provides helpful prerequisite: 'Use list_service_categories first if you want to attach to an existing category.' This guides the agent on when to call a sibling tool. However, it does not explicitly compare with other creation tools or state when not to use this tool.

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