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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey safety and side effects. The word 'Lista' implies a read-only operation, and the description details the response fields, adding useful context. However, it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor does it mention authentication requirements or potential errors, leaving some transparency gaps.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that clearly conveys the tool's functionality and output fields without any unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise and 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?

The description provides a good overview of the tool's behavior and output, including the cancellation field. However, the lack of explanation for the token parameter and any error/sorting/pagination behavior leaves some gaps for a list tool, especially without an output schema.

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 schema has only a 'token' parameter with no description, and the description does not explain the token's purpose, format, or origin. This leaves the agent without guidance on how to obtain or use the token, making parameter semantics poor.

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 tool lists all guest reservations (past and future) with specific fields like status, hotel, dates, price, and free cancellation availability. It uses a specific verb ('Lista') and resource ('reservas') and is distinguishable from siblings like cancel_booking or get_order_status.

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 indicates the tool is used to retrieve a complete list of reservations for the guest, which is a clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as when to use get_order_status instead for a single booking's status.

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