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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds value beyond them: it discloses the auth requirement and explicitly states that guest assignments and occupant identities are excluded, which is meaningful scoping context.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, but the middle is a dense run-on enumeration of return fields. Since no output schema exists the enumeration earns its place, but the packing into one sentence hurts readability.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description correctly compensates by enumerating returned fields, and it notes the sign-in requirement and excluded data. Adequate for an agent to call and interpret it, though pagination/size behavior is unaddressed.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage on the single wedding_id parameter, the schema already carries the semantics. The description only refers to 'the selected wedding' and does not add format or selection detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (Lists) and resource (the selected wedding's places) and is detailed about what the listing contains. It does not name or differentiate against siblings like get_my_accommodation, so an agent must infer the list-vs-single distinction.

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 'the selected wedding's places' and the precondition 'Requires sign-in' is stated, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or routing to get_my_accommodation / place_my_guests_in_rooms alternatives.

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