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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read contract is covered. The description adds only the filterable dimensions and the endpoint path; it says nothing about pagination behavior, default result ordering, or result volume, which would be useful additional context for a list endpoint with 12 params.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the resource and then the filter facets; nothing is padded. The endpoint path at the end is arguably waste for an agent but it is a single trailing token.

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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns at a level an agent needs to select and call it. Pagination and default sorting are handled by the schema, so their absence from the description is acceptable, though a note on result size or default ordering would complete it.

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 every parameter is already documented in the schema, including the date format and enum values. The description restates a subset of the filter parameters (time range, status, type, payment method, vehicle, client) but omits page, per_page, order, order_by, and search_string, adding no new 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ('List bookings of the organisation') and enumerates the filterable dimensions, so an agent can tell it apart from siblings like limoexpress_list_clients or limoexpress_list_booking_offers. It is clear but does not explicitly contrast itself with any sibling tool.

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 ('List bookings... Filter by pickup time range...') and the filters give a hint of when this tool applies, but there is no statement of when to prefer it over alternatives or any prerequisite context. The trailing endpoint reference adds nothing operational.

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