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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description does add genuinely non-obvious behavior — that the date filter is an inclusive overlap test rather than containment — but it is silent on defaults when no filters are given (all bookings?), result ordering, and any per-call scope or permission requirements.

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 with the primary purpose first, followed by the two pieces of non-obvious semantics. No filler and nothing redundant.

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 six-parameter, zero-required search tool with no output schema, the description should clarify the unfiltered behavior, identifier formats, and result ordering. It covers the range semantics well but leaves those gaps, which matter 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?

Schema coverage is only 33%: page and limit are documented in-schema, while start, end, project and resource have no descriptions there. The description partially compensates by explaining the overlap semantics of start/end and naming the filter roles of project/resource, but it never says whether resource/project are IDs or names, nor that all parameters are optional.

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 ('Find bookings') and enumerates the filter axes (resource, project, date range). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling list_bookings or search_time_entries, so the agent must infer that this is the filtered variant.

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?

The sentence about start/end selecting overlapping bookings gives real usage semantics for those two parameters, and pagination is noted as zero-based. However, there is no guidance on when to prefer this over list_bookings or get_booking, nor on what happens if a caller supplies no filters at all.

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