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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses the HTML output format, the hard prerequisite of status 'reservado', and locale fallback to the booking language. It does not mention token/auth requirements or the exact failure behavior when the status is not 'reservado', so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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 front-loaded with the resource and output format, then the prerequisite/alternative tool, then the locale parameter. Every sentence adds operational information with no wasted prose.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description states the return is the complete HTML voucher. It covers the key prerequisite and locale behavior, but required parameters token/order_id semantics and error behavior are not fully addressed, and no annotations fill those gaps.

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 0%, so the description should compensate. It fully defines locale with accepted values ('pt', 'es', 'en') and fallback behavior, and order_id is inferable as the reservation identifier, but token is completely undocumented and order_id is not explicitly described.

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: returns the complete HTML voucher for an already confirmed reservation. The 'already confirmed' qualifier and the parenthetical status check distinguish it from status or booking-list tools.

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?

Explicitly says it only works after the reservation has status 'reservado' and tells the agent to confirm with get_order_status first. It also describes the intended action: show/describe the voucher to the guest or guide saving/printing for check-in.

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