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

Annotations only supply destructiveHint=true, so the description carries real weight and delivers: it discloses the deferred booking behavior, that Momence auto-selects the best matching bought membership unless useBoughtMembershipIds overrides it, and the returned waitlistBookingId. That partially explains the destructive/mutating nature. It does not mention auth requirements or whether the addition itself can be rejected, keeping it short of a 5.

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, front-loaded with the core action, then the non-obvious side effect, then the return value and endpoint. Every sentence earns its place and nothing is padded.

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 compensates by naming the return value (waitlistBookingId) and by explaining the deferred mutation and membership-selection logic. For a 3-parameter mutation tool with full schema coverage, nothing an agent needs in order 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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine meaning beyond the schema text: it explains that omitting useBoughtMembershipIds makes Momence pick the best matching membership, i.e. the consequence of leaving the parameter out. That is information the schema's one-line description does not convey.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Put a member on a session's waitlist') and distinguishes itself from siblings like momence_book_member_free and momence_cancel_session_booking, which all operate on session bookings but do something different. An agent can select this tool without opening any schema.

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 description implies when this is used (a member wants a session that has no available spot) and explains membership-selection behavior at booking time, but never explicitly states when to prefer it over alternatives such as momence_book_member_free, nor any preconditions (e.g., session must be full). Usage is implied rather than stated.

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