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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds that results include customer, tickets, and status and lists primary filter axes, plus API endpoints, but omits pagination behavior, default ordering, and rate/limit details.

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 the purpose, then filtering capabilities, then optional vendor scoping, with no filler. The API endpoint reference is compact and useful for agents familiar with the API.

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 13-parameter list operation with no output schema, the description only partially covers returned data and ignores paging, sorting, field selection, and delta_since behavior. The detailed schema compensates substantially, but operational context is still incomplete.

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%, so the schema already documents all 13 parameters, including limit, offset, order, fields, match, and delta_since. The description only names a subset of filters (order date, event date, status, order code, vendor) and adds no format or default semantics beyond the schema, making 3 the appropriate baseline.

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 ('List orders (bookings)') and names included data (customer, tickets, status). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like bookingkit_get_order or bookingkit_list_order_tickets, but the resource scope is clear enough for selection.

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?

Explains that results can be filtered by order date, event date, status, order code, and vendor, implying exploratory listing use. It gives no explicit when-to-use guidance versus bookingkit_get_order or bookingkit_list_order_tickets, nor any exclusions.

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