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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), and the description still adds real value: booking, account creation and payment happen off-tool, availability is not verified, and nothing is reserved. It also names return fields (image_url, images) despite no output schema, though it doesn't describe the price-estimate format or failure behavior for unknown spaces.

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 what is returned, then usage, then caveats, then return fields — a logical order with no filler. The trailing sentence about photos is slightly tacked on but earns its place given there is no output schema.

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 read-only, closed-world, three-parameter link generator with no output schema, the description covers trigger, exclusions, off-tool handoff, and returned fields. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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 67% and the description compensates usefully by explaining that date and duration are optional prefill values and that duration is what unlocks the price estimate — meaning the schema does not state. The 'space' parameter still relies entirely on the schema's name list, so it isn't fully additive.

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 ('Returns Zenith's booking page for a Zenith Workspaces room') and immediately scopes what the URL can contain (date, duration, price estimate). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings, which only check availability, list spaces, or fetch info.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger ('Use when someone wants to book a Zenith room') and explicit exclusions with the alternative named: 'this tool does not check availability (use check_availability) or reserve anything.' An agent cannot confuse this routing decision.

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