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

Annotations only declare readOnly=false, openWorld=true, destructive=false; the description goes well beyond them by disclosing the downstream workflow (enquiry routed to the Nomad Stays team, availability checked, email reply within one working day), the auth requirement ('bookings' scope), and the fact that member identity is supplied by the account.

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 the core purpose and trigger, and each sentence adds a distinct instruction (workflow, identity, consent, alternative). It is slightly long, but no sentence is filler except perhaps the redundant timing detail.

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 4-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers trigger, routing, downstream outcome, identity handling, and required scope. An agent has everything needed to decide and invoke correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it tells the agent what to put in 'message' (who is travelling, work needs, questions) and that name/email must not be collected. It says nothing extra about nights or arrivalDate 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Send an enquiry about a Stay that can't be booked right now') and immediately scopes the trigger condition. It explicitly distinguishes itself from bookStay and quoteStayBooking, so an agent can route correctly without opening any schema.

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 explicit when-to-use conditions (quoteStayBooking finds no bookable package, or the Stay page says it isn't bookable online) and an explicit when-not-to-use rule ('Use bookStay instead whenever a quote succeeds'). It also adds a consent guardrail ('Only send an enquiry the member has asked for').

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