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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read-only nature (listing) and authentication requirement (none), but lacks details on pagination, error handling, or response format. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

The description is one precise sentence followed by a list of optional filters. Every part is necessary, and the most important information (purpose and required parameter) is front-loaded.

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?

Given the moderate complexity of 7 parameters and no output schema, the description provides a good overview but omits details like return format, pagination, or error cases. It is minimally viable but not comprehensive.

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?

The description adds meaning beyond the schema by grouping optional filters and clarifying that amenities are comma-separated. Schema coverage is 71%, and the description compensates for parameters like bed_type and resource_class that lack schema descriptions.

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 clearly states the action (list), resource (bookable resources of a tenant), and scope (by public slug), distinguishing it from sibling tools which focus on reservations, branding, or groups.

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 use for listing resources and notes 'No API key required', but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives or provide exclusions. The sibling tools are sufficiently different, so the purpose is clear enough.

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