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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description must handle behavioral context. It does not mention permissions, whether the package becomes immediately active, or any side effects. The only added info is about parameter usage, not about the tool's behavior or consequences.

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, no fluff. The first sentence defines the action and resource, the second delivers an essential usage nuance. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

With 8 parameters and an output schema, the description defines the resource and covers the key conditional logic (applicableType/applicableItems). However, it does not mention preconditions, required permissions, or what happens after creation. Given the schema's richness and the presence of an output schema, it is reasonably complete but not exhaustive.

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%, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds meaningful semantics by explaining the relationship between applicableType and applicableItems: using SELECTED with specific items limits the package. This clarifies a parameter dependency that the schema only tersely states, going beyond the field descriptions.

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?

The description states 'Create a service package/prepaid session bundle' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling create_* tools like create_service or create_product. The phrase 'limit the package to specific booking services or events' further clarifies the purpose.

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?

The description gives a practical usage hint: 'Use applicableType=SELECTED with applicableItems to limit the package to specific booking services or events.' This tells the agent when to use these parameters, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives like update_service_package or delete_service_package. The guidance is useful but not comprehensive regarding tool selection.

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