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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states that the hold is temporary, nothing is paid, the tickets are not the user's until checkout is completed, and the hold expires on its own. It also discloses limits (max 10 tickets and 10 ticket types), leaving no major behavioral surprises.

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 compact and front-loaded. The first sentence states the core action, the second emphasizes the temporary nature, and the third covers limits and exclusions. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy or low-value filler.

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 tool with no output schema, the description is exceptionally complete. It explains the return value (checkout URL), the temporary nature, expiration behavior, limits, and when to use an alternative tool. No critical details are 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?

The input schema already describes both parameters comprehensively (100% coverage). The description adds valuable constraints beyond the schema: the maximum of 10 tickets and 10 ticket types per reservation, which helps the agent validate input. This goes slightly beyond the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Hold tickets for an event sold through this site (Wix Events) and return a checkout URL.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_booking, create_checkout, and request_reservation by focusing on temporary holds rather than final purchases or reservations.

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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance: it only works for events sold directly through Wix Events. It also names an alternative for other cases: 'use the event's own ticketUrl instead' for events sold on Sympla, Ingresse, or Sesc. This gives the agent clear decision criteria.

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