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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses important side effects: 'Opening Book starts course checkout and may hold a slot; Pin Seeker does not pay.' This is precisely the kind of behavioral context an agent needs to warn users appropriately, and it adds significant value beyond the annotations.

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 compact, well-organized, and front-loaded with the core purpose. Each sentence earns its place: purpose, use cases, a prerequisite clarification, return values, behavioral caveats, and missing-input handling. There is no fluff or repetition.

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 two-parameter search tool with strong annotations and no output schema, the description covers everything needed to call it correctly: what to search, how to search, what is returned, important behavioral side effects, and how to handle missing inputs. Nothing significant is left out.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters well. The description adds some useful context about the query ('No GolfNow FacilityId needed' and asking for city/ZIP/course and date) but does not materially extend the schema's parameter documentation. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Search') and clearly identifies the resource and scope: golf tee times, hot deals, and cheapest rounds by city, ZIP, or course name. There are no sibling tools to differentiate from, so the clarity fully satisfies the purpose dimension.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('Use for tee times, booking a round, weekend golf, twilight, or comparing courses nearby') and clarifies a prerequisite/limitation ('No GolfNow FacilityId needed'). It also tells the agent to ask for missing city/ZIP/course and date, giving clear operational guidance.

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