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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It states the tool returns real, bookable photographers and lists the returned fields, but does not disclose pagination, sorting, error conditions, or authentication requirements. For a read-oriented search tool this is adequate but not deeply transparent.

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 with no filler. The core action is first, the prerequisite is embedded, and the return fields are listed compactly. Every sentence earns its place.

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 two-parameter search tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the key context: input source, optional filter, output fields, and the importance of the returned uid. It does not specify the response envelope (e.g., array), pagination, or error behavior, so it stops just short of complete.

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% – both parameters already have descriptions in the input schema. The description restates the source of shoot_type_id and the optional narrowing by city_id, but adds no new semantic detail such as value formats, range constraints, or dependencies beyond the schema.

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 a specific action ('Find real, bookable photographers') with an explicit input (shoot_type_id, optionally city_id) and output fields. It references search_shoot_types as the source of the id, which distinguishes it from siblings like create_reservation and get_reservation_status, and clarifies it as a discovery step.

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 clear context: use it after getting a shoot_type_id from search_shoot_types, and use the returned uid for every later call. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use instructions or named alternatives, but the workflow sequencing is clear.

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