Lodgify MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Get' implies a read operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, has rate limits, returns paginated results (though parameters suggest it), or what format the bookings data takes. The description mentions filtering but doesn't explain behavioral aspects like default ordering, error conditions, or response structure.

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 efficiently structured with a clear purpose statement followed by a well-organized parameter list. Each parameter explanation is brief but informative. There's no wasted text, though the formatting could be slightly improved (note the inconsistent indentation of 'end_date'). Overall, it's appropriately sized for a 6-parameter tool.

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 read operation with 6 parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is moderately complete. It covers all parameters well but lacks behavioral context (authentication, rate limits, response format). The absence of output schema means the description should ideally mention what 'bookings' data looks like, but it doesn't. It's adequate but has clear gaps for agent invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well by providing clear explanations for all 6 parameters. It adds meaningful context beyond the schema: explaining 'size' as 'maximum number', 'page' for pagination, 'property_id' for filtering, 'status' with examples, and date formats for 'start_date'/'end_date'. This significantly enhances understanding beyond the bare 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 the tool's purpose as 'Get bookings with optional filtering', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_booking_by_id' (single booking) and 'get_calendar'/'get_occupancy_summary' (different data types), though it doesn't explicitly mention these distinctions in the description text itself.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to choose this over 'get_booking_by_id' for single bookings, or how it differs from 'get_calendar' or 'get_occupancy_summary' for related data. There's no discussion of prerequisites, limitations, or appropriate contexts for use.

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