hemmabo_booking_reschedule

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

Annotations already indicate destructive hint and non-idempotent. Description adds context: 'Destructive write that may charge or refund via Stripe' and 'rate-limited per token'. This goes beyond annotations but could further detail what gets destroyed.

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?

Description is concise and front-loaded with purpose and usage conditions. Each sentence adds value; no redundancy. Efficiently uses 7 sentences to cover all key aspects.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (automatic repricing, Stripe) and presence of output schema, the description fully covers prerequisites, parameters, and backend effects. Includes reference to check status before use.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds meaning by explaining that reservationId identifies the booking from other tools, and that date changes drive repricing and Stripe charges/refunds. Adds value beyond schema descriptions.

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 action: 'Reschedule a confirmed or pending booking to new dates'. It specifies the resource (booking) and distinguishes from siblings like cancel, create, and status.

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 states when to use ('guest wants to change dates on an existing booking') and when not to use ('if cancelled or if a protocol compatibility client reports completed'). Includes prerequisite: 'check hemmabo_booking_status first'. Also mentions authorization requirements.

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