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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes this is a safe read, so the bar is lower, yet the description adds real value by enumerating the returned fields (product, times, participants, options, price, paid amount, status) and the status enum values. It does not mention auth or pagination, but for a single-item read that gap is minor.

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 compact clauses, front-loaded with the core purpose followed by the returned fields, plus a terse API endpoint reference. Nothing is padded and every element 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?

No output schema exists, so the description bears the return-value burden and largely meets it by listing the key returned fields and status values. The remaining gap is that the two expand flags and their effect on the response are never mentioned.

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 description coverage is 100% and the schema documents all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description only echoes the bookingNumber input and says nothing about expandCustomer/expandParticipants, adding no meaning 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 ('Get one booking by its booking number') and enumerates the payload it returns. The phrase 'one booking' cleanly distinguishes it from the sibling bookeo_list_bookings, so an agent can route without opening the 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?

Usage is implied by 'by its booking number' (you must already have the number), but there is no explicit when-to-use versus when-not, and no named alternative such as list_bookings or search_matching_slots. Adequate but leaves the routing inference to the agent.

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