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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one behavioral fact beyond that — results are ordered by start date — but says nothing about pagination behavior, defaults, or result volume, which matters for an 11-filter list endpoint.

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 verb and resource, then the returned fields, then filter semantics. Three dense sentences with no filler and nothing repeated from the schema.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the row fields and ordering, and the filter semantics are explained for an 11-param tool with zero required params. The remaining gap is pagination behavior, which the schema's next_offset hint only partially covers.

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 82%, so the schema already documents nearly every parameter including the arrivals/departures framing. The description's added value is mainly the concrete 'today's arrivals' example and the active_on phrasing ('who is in the property on a day'), which goes slightly beyond the schema's wording but is not essential information the agent couldn't derive.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource and enumerates the three event kinds returned (bookings, blocked periods, notes), plus the fields in each row. It implicitly separates itself from bookingmood_list_bookings by covering blocked periods and notes, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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 concrete guidance on which filter family to pick: date-range filters for arrivals/departures versus active_on for occupancy on a given day, with a worked example (start_date_from = start_date_to = today = today's arrivals). It lacks any explicit 'when not to use this / use X instead' routing.

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