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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered, but the description carries the rest of the burden. It usefully discloses the shape of the result (time, teacher, location, capacity, booking count), which matters because there is no output schema, yet it says nothing about pagination defaults, result limits, or whether cancelled sessions are excluded by default.

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-load the purpose and the returned fields, then the filter capability. The trailing 'Momence: GET /api/v2/host/sessions' adds provenance but is the one element not strictly earning its place for an agent.

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-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, filtering, and returned fields adequately, and readOnlyHint covers safety. It could go further on pagination behavior and cancelled-session defaults, but nothing essential 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 description coverage is 100%, so all 13 parameters including enums and defaults are already documented in the schema. The description's filter summary ('date window, type, teacher or location') mirrors the schema without adding syntax, defaults, or interaction rules (e.g. includeChildLocations only matters with locationId). 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 and resource ('List the studio's scheduled sessions') and even enumerates what a session can be (classes, events, courses) plus the fields returned. It does not differentiate itself from siblings like momence_get_session or momence_list_session_bookings, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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 says what can be filtered ('Filter by date window, type, teacher or location'), which implies when the tool is useful, but gives no explicit when-to-use vs. alternatives and no exclusions (e.g. 'use get_session for a single session'). 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.