hemmabo_booking_status

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

Discloses read-only nature (already in annotations), but adds critical details: requires Bearer token (MCP_API_KEY or OAuth), returns guest PII (name, email), and rate-limiting per token. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two efficient sentences front-loading the purpose and usage, with no wasted words. Every sentence adds value: purpose, usage guidance, and behavioral details.

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 simple tool (one required parameter, clear schema, and annotations), the description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, required authorization, data returned (including PII concern), and rate limits. No gaps.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, already explaining the reservationId parameter's origin (from hemmabo_booking_checkout or hemmabo_booking_create). The tool description adds no new meaning beyond repeating this context.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves current status and details of an existing booking by reservationId. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like hemmabo_booking_cancel and hemmabo_booking_reschedule by explicitly noting its use before those actions.

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 says 'Use to confirm checkout/create succeeded or before cancel/reschedule', providing clear context on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Also mentions authorization and rate limits.

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