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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations by specifying that it returns 'one published' catalog and enumerating the exact data categories included, including 'derived booking capabilities.'

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 front-loaded sentence that begins with the action and resource, then efficiently lists all catalog contents in a compact enumeration. Every element adds information, with no filler or repetition.

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 listing tool with one well-documented parameter and an output schema, the description is complete: it states the scope ('one published'), the resource type, and the full set of returned data categories. No critical selection or behavioral information 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?

The single parameter 'tenant' already has a thorough schema description covering its source and format, and schema description coverage is 100%. The tool description does not need to add parameter details, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Returns') and names the resource ('Kirah business catalog') with a detailed list of contents: services, providers, timezone, prices, durations, deposits, intake questions, and derived booking capabilities. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like find_available_services or search_services, which focus on availability or search rather than the full published catalog.

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 clearly implies this is the tool for retrieving the full published catalog, but it does not explicitly state when to choose it over alternatives like find_available_services or search_services. There are no exclusions or direct comparisons to sibling tools, so the usage context is inferred rather than stated.

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