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

Annotations only declare destructiveHint=true, so the description should carry most of the behavioral burden, yet it adds no information about permissions, whether duplicate customers are merged or created, idempotency, or what the response contains. The inline-booking note is workflow context rather than behavioral disclosure.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the routing hint. The raw API endpoint line ('Bookeo: POST /customers.') is low-value filler for an agent that already knows the tool name.

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?

No output schema and near-empty annotations mean the description must cover behavior and parameters, but it does neither; a 10-parameter create tool with nested objects is described in two functional sentences. Adequate for routing, inadequate for correct invocation.

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?

Ten parameters at 20% schema description coverage, with a nested address object and phone-number array, and the description adds zero parameter meaning. Names of required fields, format expectations, or constraints are left entirely to the thin 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 ('Create a customer record') and explicitly routes against the sibling that could do the same job implicitly ('bookeo_create_booking can create the customer inline'). An agent can tell this apart from create_booking and update_customer without opening a 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 a clear when-not-to-use condition tied to a named alternative tool, which is genuinely useful routing. It does not cover the other relevant alternatives (update_customer, get_customer) or state prerequisites such as duplicate handling.

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