hemmabo_booking_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns booking details (dates, guests, price, status, etc.) and implies a read operation. It lacks disclosure on side effects, rate limits, or auth requirements, but the described behavior is clear and non-destructive.

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 two concise sentences. The first states the purpose, the second provides usage guidelines and lists returned fields. No redundant information, well front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description lists key return fields (booking dates, guests, price, status, property info, cancellation policy). It positions the tool within the booking workflow. It could detail error handling or exact structure, but is sufficient for typical 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?

The schema covers 100% of the single parameter with a description including format and example. The tool description adds value by specifying the parameter should be a UUID from hemmabo_booking_checkout or hemmabo_booking_create, providing essential context 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 the tool retrieves current status and full details of an existing booking, with specific use cases like checking payment status and confirming booking success. It differentiates from siblings by mentioning its role before rescheduling or cancelling, and advises use after hemmabo_booking_checkout.

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 explicit when to use: to check payment status, confirm booking, or look up details before rescheduling or cancelling. It also suggests using after checkout if unsure. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternative tools.

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