List bookings

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

"Read-only" merely restates readOnlyHint=true from the annotations, adding no new behavioral information. It omits things an agent would want for a list-everything tool such as pagination, result size limits, or ordering.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler, appropriate for a simple list tool. The second sentence is redundant with the annotations, which slightly dilutes the otherwise tight structure.

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 parameterless list tool with no output schema, the description conveys the payload shape (bookings with status). It is still incomplete on result boundaries – no mention of pagination, volume, or ordering, which matter for an unfiltered list-all endpoint.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema-carried burden is nil and the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no filtering input is needed, matching the empty schema.

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 and resource ("List all bookings") plus the notable scope "all", and the resource alone separates it from list_customers. However it makes no explicit differentiation from siblings like check_availability or get_customer, and no indication of ordering or paging scope.

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 only guidance is the implied read-only safety context; there is no statement of when to use this versus check_availability (availability lookup), get_customer, or cancel_booking. An agent must infer the use case entirely.

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