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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, and the description's 'Read-only' largely restates that. However it adds real behavior beyond the annotations: the 31-day maximum search window, the token-only paging rule, that results carry an estimated price, and the underlying Bookeo endpoints.

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-loads purpose and price estimate, then layers scope, window limit, paging, and endpoints. Every sentence carries information, though the endpoint listing is slightly dense tail matter that could be trimmed.

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 10-parameter search tool with a fully-covered schema and no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (slots with estimated price), the scope of products supported, the time window limit, and how to paginate. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so all ten parameters are already documented in the schema, including the -00:00 timezone convention and id-vs-name alternatives. The description only adds the cross-cutting 31-day window constraint, which is a marginal increment over the schema's own text.

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+resource ('Find slots that can take a given party') plus the distinguishing capability of returning an estimated price and supporting all product types including flexibleTime. An agent can distinguish this from bookeo_get_availability_slots by the party-composition filtering and pricing.

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 clear operational context: works for all product types including flexibleTime, 31-day window cap, and the exact rule for paging (pass only pageNavigationToken + pageNumber). It stops short of explicitly naming when to prefer a sibling such as bookeo_get_availability_slots, so no exclusion guidance.

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