hemmabo_booking_create

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

No annotations exist, so description fully handles behavioral disclosure. It reveals booking is created with status 'pending', requires host approval, and advises on retry logic. However, does not mention authorization requirements or reversibility (e.g., cancellation via sibling tool).

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?

Four sentences, no filler. First sentence states purpose, second gives usage guidance, third adds retry warning, fourth summarizes output. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

No output schema, but description covers return values (bookingId, final price, confirmation details). Combined with good parameter descriptions in schema and behavioral notes, it is mostly complete. Missing state implications (e.g., once created, how to modify) but acceptable for a create tool.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description lists return fields but does not add new meaning for parameters beyond the schema; the optional guestPhone is noted but not highlighted. No additional semantics for parameter constraints or examples beyond what schema provides.

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 clearly: 'Create a direct booking without online payment (legacy flow).' Identifies the verb ('create'), resource ('booking'), and distinguishes from sibling 'hemmabo_booking_checkout' by contrasting payment flows.

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?

Explicitly specifies when to use ('user wants to book without Stripe payment') and when not to use ('Do NOT use for paid bookings — use hemmabo_booking_checkout instead'). Also warns against retrying on timeout without calling hemmabo_booking_status first, preventing duplicate bookings.

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