List reservations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds nothing beyond the safety profile - no mention of pagination behaviour, default result size, or what is returned, leaving the behavioral burden entirely on structured fields.

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?

A single short sentence with no waste and the resource front-loaded. However, its brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined concision, so it earns only a middling score.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained in the description, and all parameters are documented in the schema. What is missing is any scroll/filter scope guidance (e.g. whether reservations can be narrowed by item or date), which leaves the definition minimally adequate for a list 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% with all three parameters (range, fields, format) fully documented including enum meanings, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no parameter detail, which is the expected baseline when coverage is complete.

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 a specific verb (List) and resource (reservations), with a parenthetical clarifying that reservations means bookings of reservable items. It is clear against most siblings, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from glpi_list_reservation_items or glpi_get_reservation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as glpi_list_reservation_items or glpi_get_reservation, nor any mention of prerequisites or filtering conditions. The tool's purpose implies listing, but nothing is stated about routing or exclusions.

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