POST /checkout (Conexa Coworking > Check-out)

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

Annotations indicate write (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false) operations. The description adds behavioral detail about datetime defaulting to current time and the ability to create pending checkouts, but does not cover other behaviors like authorization or side effects.

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 well-structured with a summary line and bullet points for fields. It is slightly verbose but every sentence adds value, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 write operation with no output schema, the description adequately covers required and optional parameters, default behavior, and datetime format. It is comprehensive enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema only defines a generic 'body' object with no parameter details. The description fully compensates by listing all parameters (personId, workspaceId, datetime, notes), their types, required status, and datetime format, adding essential meaning beyond the 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?

The description clearly states it is for registering a checkout with person, workspace, and datetime. It specifies the system (Conexa) and the fields, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like create_checkin or checkout_room_booking.

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 provides usage context such as default datetime behavior when not provided and the ability to do a pending checkout by specifying datetime. However, it does not discuss when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions.

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