cal_get_booking

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It states 'Get details', implying a read operation, but does not confirm idempotency, disclose any side effects, or mention potential errors (e.g., not found, auth failure). The agent cannot infer safety or restrictions.

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 extremely concise: two sentences with no redundant words. Every part is necessary. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose, making it quick to parse. No improvement needed.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description conveys the essential purpose. However, it does not explain what 'details' are returned or how the agent can interpret the response. While functionally tolerable, it leaves a gap in the agent's understanding of the output.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only restates that 'uid' is required, which is already evident from the schema. No additional meaning is added about the format, source, or expected value of the UID. This does not help the agent beyond the schema itself.

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 action ('Get details') and the resource ('a specific booking') and specifies the identifier ('by its UID'). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'cal_list_bookings' (list all) and 'cal_create_booking' (create). However, 'details' is vague and could be more precise, preventing a higher score.

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 only mentions that 'uid' is required. It provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when you need all bookings vs a single one), nor does it mention prerequisites or scenarios to avoid. This leaves the agent without explicit decision support.

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