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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes this as a safe read, so the description adds little on the safety axis. It does disclose what the response contains (time, teacher, location, capacity, booking count), but says nothing about pagination behavior or the default exclusion of cancelled sessions.

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 tight sentences with the resource and returned fields front-loaded, followed by the filter dimensions. No filler, and the API endpoint is a compact addendum.

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 read tool with no output schema, the description helpfully summarizes the returned fields and the filter axes, which is the key missing context. It stops short of covering pagination defaults or the cancelled-session default, but is largely adequate.

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 enums and ISO 8601 formats. The description only restates the filter categories generically and adds no format or default details beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (List) and resource (scheduled sessions) and enumerates the subtypes it covers (classes, events, courses) plus the returned fields, which clearly separates it from momence_get_session (single session) and momence_list_session_bookings (bookings). An agent can identify it without opening the 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?

It names the filter dimensions (date window, type, teacher, location), which implies the intended usage, but never states when to prefer this over siblings like momence_list_session_bookings or when to exclude cancelled sessions. Usage is implied rather than explicit.

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