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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It usefully discloses that there is no deep link for a date and that the guest selects date/time on the page, plus what is returned (page/widget and phone). It does not address permissions or return shape beyond that, which is acceptable for a simple read-only lookup but not rich.

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?

Content is front-loaded and efficient, spanning only a few sentences. The closing English gloss 'How to reserve a table' repeats the opening Russian phrase, which is minor redundancy but does not bloat the definition.

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 1-param, 100%-covered lookup with no output schema and no annotations, the description conveys what it returns (page/widget and phone) and its key limitation (no date deep link). Sufficient for an agent to call it correctly, though the exact return format is only loosely sketched.

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%, and the schema already explains that the optional date param is for checking opening hours. The description reinforces that the date does not produce a deep link, adding mild clarity. Baseline 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states the resource clearly: booking page/widget and phone for reserving a table. It also distinguishes itself from a hypothetical date-specific link by saying no deep link exists. However, the name 'get_reservation_link' and the disclosure that there's no per-date link create slight tension, though the intent (how to reserve) is legible.

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?

Usage is implied by 'How to reserve a table' — an agent can infer this is the tool to answer reservation questions. But there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not framing, and no siblings (e.g. get_order_link) are named as alternatives. Implied only.

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