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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the backing REST endpoint (GET /v2/inquiries), which hints at pagination semantics, but says nothing about return shape, paging behavior, or authentication beyond what the schema and annotations imply.

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 declarative sentences, front-loaded with the identity of the resource. The endpoint reference is arguably extraneous for an agent, but it is compact and does not bury the key information.

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 listing tool whose annotations supply the safety profile and whose schema fully documents paging parameters, the description covers enough to call it correctly. It would be stronger with a note on pagination defaults or the inquiry-to-booking distinction, but no critical gap remains.

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 limit, offset, and params are fully documented in the schema itself. The description only echoes that `params` carries filters, adding no syntax, format, or merge-behavior detail beyond the schema baseline.

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 guest inquiries') and adds a useful domain gloss ('pre-booking leads') that clarifies what an inquiry is. It does not, however, distinguish itself explicitly from list_bookings or list_guests, leaving the agent to 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 only guidance is 'Use `params` for documented filters', which is an invocation hint, not a when-to-use statement. There is no indication of when an inquiry list is preferable to list_bookings or any sibling, nor any prerequisite or exclusion.

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