search_reservations

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that the search matches on guest name, email, or confirmation code, which is useful but not beyond what the input schema already states. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., return format, ordering, pagination) are disclosed.

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 sentence of nine words, immediately stating the tool's purpose. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 read-only search tool with two well-documented parameters and strong annotations, the description is sufficient. It could mention that results are returned or how limit affects output, but the absence of an output schema and the straightforward nature of the operation mean the description does not leave major gaps.

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%, and the description essentially repeats the `query` parameter's meaning. The `limit` parameter is only described in the schema, not in the tool description. Since the schema carries the full parameter semantics, the description adds no extra value beyond a baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('reservations') and specifies the searchable fields (guest name, email, or confirmation code). This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tool `get_reservations`, which likely lists all reservations rather than performing a targeted search.

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 implies the use case: use this tool when you have a guest name, email, or confirmation code to find reservations. It provides clear context for when to use, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like `get_reservations` for broader listing.

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