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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutating operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds the semantic of marking as no-show but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like reversibility, prerequisites, or side effects. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the verb and object. It contains no unnecessary words and is easy to parse.

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 tool with one parameter, a clear purpose, and an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It provides the essential context for an agent to decide when and how to use it, and the output schema handles return-value documentation.

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?

The input schema fully documents the single parameter (bookingId) with a clear description, yielding 100% schema coverage. The description does not add any extra semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline.

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 clearly states the action ('Mark'), the resource ('a booking'), and the specific condition ('when the customer did not attend'). This distinguishes it from related booking tools like cancel_booking and complete_booking.

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 phrase 'when the customer did not attend' provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool. However, it does not mention alternatives or exclusion criteria, such as 'use cancel_booking if the customer cancels in advance.'

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